Consistency [Two-Stage / GS Designs]

posted by DavidManteigas – Portugal, 2016-10-11 11:25 (1401 d 10:58 ago) – Posting: # 16721
Views: 10,833

Hi all,

I get shocked sometimes with the lack of consistency in assessments of member states which should all follow the same guidelines and made their reviews according to the current opinions of the scientific groups of the EMA. I think this happens due to lack of training in regulatory reviews and "regulatory science" in general (in Portugal, almost all of the reviewers I know are "academic") and also due to lack of resources in some agencies to have qualified reviewers for each 'specialty'.
In some countries, I believe that as long as you got a favourable opinion from an ethics committee and regulatory approval for the trial, they will consider your trial "valid" regardless of the appopriateness of the design, statistical methodology and compliance with guidelines/recommendations for design & analysis.

Complete thread:

Activity
 Admin contact
21,008 posts in 4,379 threads, 1,460 registered users;
online 14 (1 registered, 13 guests [including 11 identified bots]).
Forum time: Wednesday 22:23 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

Statistics is the art of never having to say you’re wrong.
Variance is what any two statisticians are at.    C.J. Bradfield

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