Canada: subject, not period [Outliers]

posted by Helmut Homepage – Vienna, Austria, 2013-08-07 17:57 (3886 d 22:28 ago) – Posting: # 11239
Views: 10,150

Hi Mac!

❝ Took some time to actually find where I could edit my profile, but I did read "the rules". :-)


Kudos!

❝ ❝ I don’t understand what you mean by incomplete block when you tested three treatments in three periods. Generally in an IBD: treatments > periods.


❝ What I mean is that even though we have 3 periods and 3 treatments, the comparisons are Test 1 vs. Ref and Test 2 vs. Ref. In other words, we "ignore" one period when comparing the two.


Interesting. Search the forum for ‘crippled model’. ;-)

❝ […] whoever prepared the guidance…


Eric Ormsby?

❝ … most likely thought about a 2x2 study, where removal of one period "removes" the entire subject from analysis.


Think so. Also ElMaestro’s guess.

❝ […] perhaps it's not our place to try to figure out what the agency was thinking when writing the guidance.


Oh no; this is the place!

❝ We're using PROC MIXED anyways.


So don’t bother.

Dif-tor heh smusma 🖖🏼 Довге життя Україна! [image]
Helmut Schütz
[image]

The quality of responses received is directly proportional to the quality of the question asked. 🚮
Science Quotes

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
22,957 posts in 4,819 threads, 1,636 registered users;
110 visitors (0 registered, 110 guests [including 6 identified bots]).
Forum time: 15:25 CET (Europe/Vienna)

With four parameters I can fit an elephant,
and with five I can make him wiggle his trunk.    John von Neumann

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