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

posted by Helmut Homepage – Vienna, Austria, 2019-09-19 15:59 (1104 d 00:03 ago) – Posting: # 20621
Views: 5,080

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 🖖 Довге життя Україна! [image]
Helmut Schütz
[image]

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

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
22,391 posts in 4,685 threads, 1,594 registered users;
online 5 (0 registered, 5 guests [including 5 identified bots]).
Forum time: Tuesday 16:02 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

Statistics. A sort of elementary form of mathematics which consists of
adding things together and occasionally squaring them.    Stephen Senn

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