Nope [Two-Stage / GS Designs]

posted by nobody – 2017-11-14 09:11 (2683 d 05:51 ago) – Posting: # 17978
Views: 9,902

IANAL, but I think what San-Diego-man is proposing is to calculate BE-outcome (pass/fail) after stage 1 and compare it to BE-outcome after the (unnecessary) second stage for, let's say, 1 gazillion of studies and see if there is a meaningful difference.

Isn't this a special example of the more general "forced BE" theme in one-stage designs?

Kindest regards, nobody

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,409 posts in 4,921 threads, 1,673 registered users;
14 visitors (0 registered, 14 guests [including 2 identified bots]).
Forum time: 15:03 CET (Europe/Vienna)

The best thing about being a statistician is
that you get to play in everyone’s backyard.    John W. Tukey

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