Interesting! [General Sta­tis­tics]

posted by DavidManteigas – Portugal, 2017-03-29 14:28 (2875 d 10:30 ago) – Posting: # 17203
Views: 9,718

Hi ElMaestro,

What I've said is that the p-value for formulation as nothing to do with the statistical conclusion of bioequivalence. For the statistical evaluation of "difference in means", to be compared with the same statistical conclusion of "difference in means" with the 90% confidence interval, the p value must be assessed against the 10% significance level. So, if your 90% Confidence Interval does not contain 1, then the p-value for formulation is also significant at the 10% significance level and may or not be also significant at the 5% significance level.

The model is build the same way whether you are assessing difference in means or bioequivalence. The hypothesis are, however, different. For the hypothesis of "bioequivalence" the alpha level is 5%, and for the hypothesis of "difference in means" the alpha level is 10%. And the p-value only assess the hypothesis of difference in means. I'm sorry if I'm not explaining myself right, I'll let someone smarter try to do a better job :-D

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,379 posts in 4,913 threads, 1,661 registered users;
83 visitors (0 registered, 83 guests [including 18 identified bots]).
Forum time: 23:58 CET (Europe/Vienna)

Science is what you know.
Philosophy is what you don’t know.    Bertrand Russell

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