Update: S×F vari­­ance test [Regulatives / Guidelines]

posted by jag009  – NJ, 2014-12-22 18:28 (4203 d 23:15 ago) – Posting: # 14136
Views: 15,874

Hi Angus,

Before I go further, just want to clarify, did you go through the exercise 1) as per FDA's concerta guidance, calculating Iij, Tij, Rij, YijR, YijT etc etc and then obtain the within-subject variances for T and R in Phoenix?
2) Or you just threw the EMA dataset (ln-transformed) into Phoenix ABE routine and obtain #s from The G matrix output? I imagine you would say #2?

I don't think approach #2 will give the right answer and the d.f. which is needed to compute the 95% CB as per FDA instruction.

Helmut and I goofed around with both scenarios (in Phoenix, and I did in SAS) and the results were a bit amusing (I will let Helmut to summarize if he wants).

John
Thread locked

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,655 posts in 4,993 threads, 1,570 registered users;
383 visitors (0 registered, 383 guests [including 23 identified bots]).
Forum time: 18:43 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

Ignorance more frequently begets confidence
than does knowledge.    Charles Darwin

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