Proposed changes [Two-Stage / GS Designs]

posted by Mauricio Sampaio  – Brazil, 2020-02-17 14:50 (2307 d 00:35 ago) – Posting: # 21177
Views: 12,715

❝ Consequences for the Consulta Pública N° 760.


Instead of: "Type I error must be preserved and adjusted, and to demonstrate bioequivalence the level of confidence is 94.12%;"

I will only propose that: It must be demonstrated that the type I error of the study is controlled.

Instead of: "This second group must have at least 50% of the previous group"

I will propose that: The number of participants in the second stage must be calculated based on the data extracted from the first stage. The calculation must be justified considering possible losses and / or dropouts observed in the first stage.

In this way, the dialogue is open and not restricted. = "on top of the wall"

[image]


Edit: Subject line changed; see also this post #2. [Helmut]

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,653 posts in 4,991 threads, 1,571 registered users;
194 visitors (0 registered, 194 guests [including 22 identified bots]).
Forum time: 16:25 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

Outside his own ever-narrowing field of specialization,
a scientist is a layman.
What members of an academy of science have in common
is a certain form of semiparasitic living.    Erwin Chargaff

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