Nice to know! [General Sta­tis­tics]

posted by Helmut Homepage – Vienna, Austria, 2012-10-17 21:11 (4988 d 17:59 ago) – Posting: # 9430
Views: 9,101

Dear Detlew!

❝ ❝ Which design is the ‘best’? Pros & cons: [...]


❝ May be that the precision of CVwR is different between these designs if powered to the same value of stating BE.

❝ But in no guidance I know the precision of CVwR is an criterion. And we don't use it in any decision.


Yessir!

❝ So what? Nice to know?


Exactly – in the spirit of Bio-International ’94, where “Need to know vs. nice to know” was the unofficial slogan. Primarily I was interested whether it is worthwhile to go with TRT|RTR instead of the partial replicate because you get the bonus of CVWT. Some sponsors are interested how their formulation performs but the 4-period replicate has its drawbacks.

Dif-tor heh smusma 🖖🏼 Довге життя Україна! [image]
Helmut Schütz
[image]

The quality of responses received is directly proportional to the quality of the question asked. 🚮
Science Quotes

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,654 posts in 4,992 threads, 1,570 registered users;
134 visitors (0 registered, 134 guests [including 18 identified bots]).
Forum time: 15:10 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

The idea is to try and give all the information to help others
to judge the value of your contribution;
not just the information that leads to judgment
in one particular direction or another.    Richard Feynman

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