Different methods/models [Power / Sample Size]

posted by jagsuraiah – 2009-03-30 15:16 (6291 d 04:14 ago) – Posting: # 3415
Views: 6,843

HI every one,

Paired equivalence method:
sample size-> Paired equivalence->multiplicative
1) multiplicative

Cv=0.62 T/R=0.95 POWER=0.80, LOWER=0.80 UPPER=1.25 then N=72
Cv=62 T/R=0.95 POWER=0.80, LOWER=80 UPPER=125 then N=1774

sample size-> Paired equivalence->Additive
2) Additive

Cv=0.62 T/R=0.95 POWER=0.80, LOWER=0.80 UPPER=1.25 then N=108
Cv=62 T/R=0.95 POWER=0.80, LOWER=80 UPPER=125 then N=108

Two-sample equivalence method:
sample size-> Two-sample equivalence->multiplicative
1) multiplicative

Cv=0.62 T/R=0.95 POWER=0.80 LOWER=0.80 UPPER=1.25 N=141
Cv=62 T/R=0.95 POWER=0.80 LOWER=80 UPPER=125 N=3546

sample size-> Two-sample equivalence->Additive
2) Additive
Cv=0.62 T/R=0.95 POWER=0.80 LOWER=0.80 UPPER=1.25 N=213
Cv=62 T/R=0.95 POWER=0.80 LOWER=0.80 UPPER=1.25 N=213


which method we have to take for finding sample size in BA/BE. Which method is accepted by regulators. give suggestion to me.
thanks in advance.
suri

--
Edit: Subject line changed; please try to be more specific the next time. Helmut

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,655 posts in 4,993 threads, 1,570 registered users;
177 visitors (0 registered, 177 guests [including 29 identified bots]).
Forum time: 19:31 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

I have finally come to the konklusion
that a good reliable set ov bowels
iz worth more to a man
than enny quantity of brains.    Josh Billings

The Bioequivalence and Bioavailability Forum is hosted by
BEBAC Ing. Helmut Schütz
HTML5