A wild guess [Surveys]

posted by ElMaestro  – Denmark, 2014-10-24 00:47 (3465 d 23:05 ago) – Posting: # 13784
Views: 10,493

Hi Hötzi,

A wild guess: I think you are fiddling around with WHO Technical Report Series, No. 937, annex 7 (Multisource BlahDeeBlah),
specifically you might be looking at section 6.3.2: "If the bioequivalence study was performed with the appropriate number of subjects but bioequivalence cannot be demonstrated because of a larger than expected random variation or a relative difference, an add-on subject study can be performed using not less than half the number of subjects in the initial study, provided this eventuality was anticipated and provided for in the study protocol."
as well as 6.11.3: "the total sample size of the initial bioequivalence study is not less than 20 (n = 10/group) or pooled sample size of the initial and add-on subject studies is not less than 30;"

-which lend from the PMDA guidelines section 2.5.
In a nutshell you are trying to figure out how the overall alpha behaves for various scenarios, incl. adjusted alphas, anticipated to comply with the Japanese add-on recommendations.

Pass or fail!
ElMaestro

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
22,988 posts in 4,825 threads, 1,656 registered users;
95 visitors (0 registered, 95 guests [including 6 identified bots]).
Forum time: 23:53 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

The only way to comprehend what mathematicians mean by Infinity
is to contemplate the extent of human stupidity.    Voltaire

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