Full-replicate design in two groups [General Sta­tis­tics]

posted by Mikalai  – Belarus, 2018-10-31 15:04 (2798 d 04:31 ago) – Posting: # 19510
Views: 4,592

Dear all,
We are conducting a full replicate design study. Due to recruiting difficulties we had to split the study in two groups. It has been suggested that we should change our statistical model to model II of FDA. What risks, if any, carry on this model to our bioequivalence? Can additional factors in model artificially reduce our CV and push us out of the scaled approach to usual 125%-80% one (I am not a statistician, so my question may be statistically correct)? Should we change our usual 4-factor model?

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,656 posts in 4,994 threads, 1,570 registered users;
307 visitors (0 registered, 307 guests [including 25 identified bots]).
Forum time: 20:35 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

Most scientists today are devoid of ideas, full of fear, intent on
producing some paltry result so that they can add to the flood
of inane papers that now constitutes “scientific progress”
in many areas.    Paul Feyerabend

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