Leads to a (pseudo-) period effect ? [Bioanalytics]

posted by Helmut Homepage – Vienna, Austria, 2019-09-19 15:59 (487 d 01:59 ago) – Posting: # 20621
Views: 3,952

Dear Ohlbe,

» Would they really ? I would say yes if he had systematically a negative bias for period 1 and a positive bias for period 2, or vice-versa. As there will not be a single run for Period 1 samples and a single run for period 2 samples, that will not necessarily be the case: some subjects will get artificially a positive bias in P1, others in P2.

Now you confused me (even reading Ravuri’s OP again did not help). If periods are analyzed in single, separate batches it should not matter in a crossover due to the randomization. Prerequisite: Always keep the order of the batches for all subjects p1 → p2 → …

What would not work:

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
21,303 posts in 4,441 threads, 1,487 registered users;
online 4 (0 registered, 4 guests [including 4 identified bots]).
Forum time: Monday 16:58 CET (Europe/Vienna)

I believe there is no philosophical high-road in science,
with epistemological signposts. No, we are in a jungle
and find our way by trial and error,
building our road behind us as we proceed.    Max Born

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