EquivTest v1 / v2 / PK [Software]

posted by yckim – 2008-05-28 03:39 (6597 d 04:18 ago) – Posting: # 1876
Views: 11,060

Dear HS

Thank you very much for your reply!
However, I am a little confused about followings.

❝ In the case of an unbalanced study (n1 # n2) only the latter.


❝ In technical terms, the second one is wrong for unbalanced studies; the bias will depend on both the overall size of the study (n1+n2) and the degree of unbalance (ratio of n1/n2).


You said the method of equivtest 2.0 is right in the former while it is wrong in the latter. Please clarify it.

Thank you.

Best regards,

Yu Chul Kim


Edit: Standard quotes restored. [Helmut]

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,655 posts in 4,993 threads, 1,570 registered users;
129 visitors (0 registered, 129 guests [including 19 identified bots]).
Forum time: 07:58 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