Questions over questions [Regulatives / Guidelines]

posted by d_labes  – Berlin, Germany, 2012-03-13 14:08 (5222 d 02:34 ago) – Posting: # 8261
Views: 6,856

My dear Ol' pirate,

don't get your point.

Why do you favour a Williams design (balanced or not) BEman has in mind over a simpler Latin square design as I suggested or a much simpler incomplete block design with less periods than treatments which Helmut suggested as one possibility, which BTW addresses your concern "the risk of dropouts"?

Why do you think this is a "... big theoretical problem ..."? Because its more unusual and lesser known then what's called Williams design everybody who had some notation of BE studies can spell correctly?

Why even a cross-over at all if

❝ much of the info about linearity in current EU SPCs and US Prescr infos are based on simply descriptive stats from designs with parallel groups or xo.


Take 5 groups with 3 subjects each (makes 15 in total :cool:) treat them with the 5 doses and make your assessment of dose linearity via descriptive stats? Is this what you have in mind?
Downright silly if two subjects from the same group drop out :-D.

Regards,

Detlew

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,656 posts in 4,994 threads, 1,571 registered users;
284 visitors (0 registered, 284 guests [including 13 identified bots]).
Forum time: 17:43 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

It requires a very unusual mind
to undertake the analysis of the obvious.    Alfred North Whitehead

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