Setup in Phoenix/WinNonlin [Study As­sess­ment]

posted by AngusMcLean – USA, 2016-05-16 21:00  – Posting: # 16317
Views: 15,336

» With Smith’s Cmax-data of Table 1 I got for the slope:
» 0.7617 (90% CI: 0.6696, 0.8539), slightly different from the reported 0.7615 (0.679, 0.844).

I have repeated the above calculation in NCSS as desribed by Jerry: here are the results of Brian Smith's example.
                                     90.0%       90.0%
          Effect   Effect            Lower       Upper
Effect    Estimate Standard Prob     Conf. Limit Conf. Limit     Effect
Name      (Beta)   Error    Level    of Beta     of Beta     DF  No.
Intercept  1.9414  0.2496   0.000025 1.4849      2.3978      9.2 1
logDose    0.7617  0.0492   0.000005 0.6659      0.8576      5.9 2

The within subject variance was 0.0146 (the same as Phoenix).

Edit: Full quote removed, tabulators changed to spaces and BBcoded. Please delete everything from the text of the original poster which is not necessary in understanding your answer; see also this post #5 and #6! [Helmut]

Complete thread:

 Mix view
Bioequivalence and Bioavailability Forum |  Admin contact
19,437 posts in 4,125 threads, 1,325 registered users;
online 10 (1 registered, 9 guests [including 5 identified bots]).
Forum time (Europe/Vienna): 02:36 CEST

On two occasions I have been asked,—“Pray, Mr. Babbage,
if you put into the machine wrong figures,…
will the right answers come out?”

I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas
that could provoke such a question.    Charles Babbage

BEBAC Ing. Helmut Schütz