ANVISA's POV on "triangulation points" [Regulatives / Guidelines]

posted by MarceloCosta – Brazil, 2015-04-06 23:52 (3729 d 04:44 ago) – Posting: # 14667
Views: 10,762

Hello Everybody,

In my point of view there is no doubt about this discussion.

1 - zero is zero.
2 - missing must be interpolated.
3 - No exclusion for outliers.

something different of this is a bad interpretation.

Must be considered in ours SOP's.

Respect all rules. All SOP's. Less manipulation.

For a better Clinical and Analytical pratices.


I know zero point in the middle of the curve is a problem, but what is the cause?
who will decide what to do in each case? I think the Agency will.

Pk Analists and Statisticians must justify your decisions.

Report the real data!!!

Edit: Full quote removed. Please delete everything from the text of the original poster which is not necessary in understanding your answer; see also this post! [Helmut]

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,424 posts in 4,927 threads, 1,672 registered users;
47 visitors (0 registered, 47 guests [including 12 identified bots]).
Forum time: 04:36 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

Medical researches can be divided into two sorts:
those who think that meta is better and those
who believe that pooling is fooling.    Stephen Senn

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