EquivTest v1 / v2 / PK [Software]

posted by yckim – 2008-05-28 03:39 (6593 d 22:10 ago) – Posting: # 1876
Views: 11,049

Dear HS

Thank you very much for your reply!
However, I am a little confused about followings.

❝ In the case of an unbalanced study (n1 # n2) only the latter.


❝ In technical terms, the second one is wrong for unbalanced studies; the bias will depend on both the overall size of the study (n1+n2) and the degree of unbalance (ratio of n1/n2).


You said the method of equivtest 2.0 is right in the former while it is wrong in the latter. Please clarify it.

Thank you.

Best regards,

Yu Chul Kim


Edit: Standard quotes restored. [Helmut]

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,654 posts in 4,992 threads, 1,571 registered users;
132 visitors (0 registered, 132 guests [including 15 identified bots]).
Forum time: 01:50 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

Always listen to experts.
They’ll tell you what can’t be done and why.
Then do it.    Robert A. Heinlein

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