I love your subject line! [General Sta­tis­tics]

posted by Helmut Homepage – Vienna, Austria, 2019-08-08 10:31 (722 d 03:13 ago) – Posting: # 20487
Views: 5,261

Ahoy, my Capt’n,

» » The precise model [:blahblah:]
»
» But on the other hand: Why then then include e.g. period?

[image]Cause otherwise eventual period effects would not mean out. ;-)

Given, sometimes one has to assume lacking period effects and everybody is happy with that. If an originator explores whether the drug follows linear PK, we have a paired design (SD → saturation → steady state) and compare AUC0–τ with AUC0–∞. A crossover would be a logistic nightmare.

» Let us for a moment disregard the actual wording. [lengthy beautiful explanation]

Exactly.

» […] For a parallel trial I think I want group in the model. If regulators don't like this, they can ask me to take it away. I happily do so without protesting. I am a sheep at that point. But not until then. :-D

Agree again.

Dif-tor heh smusma 🖖
Helmut Schütz
[image]

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

Complete thread:

Activity
 Admin contact
21,592 posts in 4,514 threads, 1,532 registered users;
online 7 (0 registered, 7 guests [including 4 identified bots]).
Forum time: Friday 13:44 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

It is a capital mistake to theorise before one has data.    Arthur Conan Doyle

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