BQL = 0: bad rule [Software]

posted by Babe_Ruth – USA, 2018-07-16 17:02 (2198 d 12:22 ago) – Posting: # 19066
Views: 7,346

Thank you Helmut! and everybody else.

You are correct, I just double-checked; the documentation in v6.3 is missing the clarification for usage of linear trapezoidal rule if BQL imputed with "0" after Tlast. This is what sparked my initial question of whether this was an intended behavior within WNL or not.

❝ Bad practice to force BQLs after tmax to zero

What about for sparse sampling methods? If there are 3 samples/time point, wouldn't we want to use 3 values for the calculation of the mean concentration? In which case imputing BQL concentrations with a value of 0 or close to 0 would be more favorable than not including the value altogether?

Sorry if my questions seem trivial! I went to Pharmacy school, and there was only 1-2 classes on PK, nothing in-depth. I've just started in this industry. Right now I'm writing TK reports and Phase I/II stuff and I'm interested in learning more about what I'm doing.

Browsing these forums in my spare time really helps me see where others are in environment of the Ba/Be world :) Searching old topics have answered most of the questions I have had, which is super helpful.

Complete thread:

UA Flag
 Admin contact
23,113 posts in 4,858 threads, 1,644 registered users;
50 visitors (0 registered, 50 guests [including 16 identified bots]).
Forum time: 05:24 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

You can’t really say “similar” if it’s the same again you want.
“Similar” means something different.    Anthony Burgess

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