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

posted by jag009  – NJ, 2014-12-22 18:28 (3405 d 11:38 ago) – Posting: # 14136
Views: 11,044

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
22,987 posts in 4,824 threads, 1,666 registered users;
76 visitors (0 registered, 76 guests [including 8 identified bots]).
Forum time: 07:06 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