Fixed effects rather than random effects [Regulatives / Guidelines]

posted by ElMaestro  – Denmark, 2014-01-21 18:12 (4540 d 17:44 ago) – Posting: # 12220
Views: 5,679

Hello Erkin,

I agree with Helmut would also like to point out that I think the issue is not treated in the same fashion across all Europe. In some countries assessors don't give a rat's fart about it, possibly because they have no idea about what a fixed vs a random effect is, while in other countries the matter is of interest just because the guideline says effects must be fixed. I have not come a across a scientific justification for avoiding random effects in BE (yet keeping them in other analyses btw).

Pass or fail!
ElMaestro

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,655 posts in 4,993 threads, 1,572 registered users;
212 visitors (0 registered, 212 guests [including 12 identified bots]).
Forum time: 12:56 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

The real struggle is not between the right and the left
but between the party of the thoughtful
and the party of the jerks.    Jimmy Wales

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