‘Method C’ ⇒ risky [Two-Stage / GS Designs]

posted by Helmut Homepage – Vienna, Austria, 2019-09-19 16:15 (601 d 13:38 ago) – Posting: # 20622
Views: 5,021

Hi Elena,

» This is our first experience in conducting such studies, so we are quite excited. :lookaround:

Keep in mind that it might also be the first experience for the experts of the agencies you are aiming at. Possibly they have heard about the skeptic attitudes of European assessors towards ‘Method C’. Consider ‘Method B’ instead. See the end of this post for a comparison of power. What will it help to have (maybe) two subject less in the second stage and a study which is not accepted? I warned you. :cool:

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
21,457 posts in 4,485 threads, 1,512 registered users;
online 14 (0 registered, 14 guests [including 1 identified bots]).
Forum time: Thursday 05:54 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

Nothing in the world is more dangerous
than sincere ignorance
and conscientious stupidity.    Martin Luther King, Jr.

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