“Forced BE” 101 [Power / Sample Size]

posted by Helmut Homepage – Vienna, Austria, 2017-12-27 13:23 (1916 d 04:31 ago) – Posting: # 18097
Views: 32,642

❝ what about regulatory queries on "unintentional forced Bioequivalence"


What do you mean by unintentional?
Again: Stop estimating post hoc power! Either the study demonstrated BE or not.*
Going back to my example (study planned for 90% power): The chance to obtain a post hoc power of ≥95% is ~35%. Now what?
It only means thatHowever, the patient’s risk (α = probability of the Type I Error) is independent from the producer’s risk (β = probability of the Type II Error). The latter might be of concern for the IEC in study planning (see Yura’s example) whereas only the former is of regulatory concern – and not affected by power.

I still think that you calculations are wrong. Therefore, you are facing high values more often. Would you mind giving us the data ElMaestro and I asked for?



Dif-tor heh smusma 🖖🏼 Довге життя Україна! [image]
Helmut Schütz
[image]

The quality of responses received is directly proportional to the quality of the question asked. 🚮
Science Quotes

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
22,552 posts in 4,724 threads, 1,606 registered users;
17 visitors (0 registered, 17 guests [including 6 identified bots]).
Forum time: 18:54 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

Learning of many things
does not teach intelligence.    Heraclitus of Ephesus

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