Bioequivalence and Bioavailability Forum

Replicate design Vienna waltz [RSABE / ABEL]

posted by d_labes  – Berlin, Germany, 2011-04-28 10:54 (5131 d 19:50 ago) – Posting: # 6960
Views: 9,044

Dear Helmut, dear Andrew!

❝ Well, I'm not sure whether the model makes sense, but it's somehow in line with EMA's simplifications. Test treatments are ignored, as is the fact that the first and second administrations of the reference occurred in different periods in sequences 1/2.

What about recoding the treatments to T1, T2 and R1, R2 (numbers are Helmut's occasions or replicates) and evaluating the data as a 4x4 crossover with 2 sequences?

But which model ever, we make the assumption that the replicates are not the (random) result of the same formulation given at two occasions to the same subject, but something different. And that is to me not justifiable. Which effects should induce such a behaviour that we could separate the effects of the replicates?
To me a point estimate R2/R1 different from =1 does not make sense therefore.

Complete thread:

• Replicate design Dr Andrew Leary 2011-04-21 11:50 
  • Replicate design ElMaestro 2011-04-21 13:04
    • Replicate design Dr Andrew Leary 2011-04-21 21:53
    • Replicate design AGAIN Dr Andrew Leary 2011-04-27 12:21
      • Replicate design limbo Helmut 2011-04-27 13:43
        • Replicate design limbo Dr Andrew Leary 2011-04-27 16:11
          • Replicate design limbo Helmut 2011-04-27 16:52
            • Replicate design Vienna waltzd_labes 2011-04-28 08:54
              • Replicate design EMA Morris dance Helmut 2011-04-28 14:17
                • EMA Morris dance d_labes 2011-05-02 12:55