WNL in replicate BE [🇷 for BE/BA]

posted by yjlee168 Homepage – Kaohsiung, Taiwan, 2010-04-26 10:59 (5908 d 03:52 ago) – Posting: # 5228
Views: 68,047

Dear Helmut,

One of bear users found the differences when he compared bear and WNL with his dataset obtained from a replicate BE study. I found that the mixed effect model used in WNL v6.x was different from bear. In WNL, the fixed terms included: int + SEQUENCE + FORMULATION + PERIOD; and the random terms: FORMULATION*SUBJECT + PERIOD*FORMULATION*SUBJECT. I don't know why WNL sets its models like this. In bear, the fixed effects were SEQUENCE + PERIOD + FORMULATION; the random effect was only FORMULATION/SUBJECT. That's why I asked the question. I should search first, like this post of yours... :-(

❝ What do you mean by "acceptable"?


All the best,
-- Yung-jin Lee
bear v2.9.6:- created by Hsin-ya Lee & Yung-jin Lee
Kaohsiung, Taiwan https://www.pkpd168.com/bear
Download link (updated) -> here

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,656 posts in 4,994 threads, 1,570 registered users;
187 visitors (1 registered, 186 guests [including 15 identified bots]).
Forum time: 14:52 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