Counterintuitive? [Design Issues]

posted by nobody – 2018-04-03 13:16 (2186 d 13:37 ago) – Posting: # 18634
Views: 6,443

Hy!

Found this Easter egg:

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11095-018-2387-4?

...only read the abstract, but the findings and Conclusion are not really intuitive to me (still in mild post-prandial coma, I must admit). Why should the most appropriate AUC metric depend on the release rate of the Test product relative to reference?

Any ideas how to wrap my head around this?

Kindest regards, nobody

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
22,957 posts in 4,819 threads, 1,636 registered users;
75 visitors (0 registered, 75 guests [including 13 identified bots]).
Forum time: 01:54 CET (Europe/Vienna)

With four parameters I can fit an elephant,
and with five I can make him wiggle his trunk.    John von Neumann

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