Very, very strange! [General Sta­tis­tics]

posted by Helmut Homepage – Vienna, Austria, 2019-10-31 14:36 (535 d 10:32 ago) – Posting: # 20738
Views: 3,056

Hi Jaimik,

a very interesting observation!

I could confirm that in Phoenix WinNonlin 8.1 (multiplied the first T value of the EMA’s reference data sets by 10). The geometric least squares mean of R changed in data set I (full replicate) but not in data set II (partial replicate).
I also checked the EMA’s methods (simple ANOVA). Similar.

Respective first rows original data, second ones T changed.

data set  RSABE      R        T   
I                2144.00  2479.70   
                 2143.04  2517.74   
II               2852.54  2917.13   
                 2852.54  3074.12   
                      Method A          Method B 
          ABEL       R        T        R        T
I                2140.84  2476.07  2143.11  2480.22
                 2140.18  2513.57  2142.71  2518.22
II               2852.54  2917.13  2852.54  2917.13
                 2852.54  3210.87  2852.54  3210.87

Beyond me. :confused:

PS: Differences between RSABE and ABEL are to be expected in case of incomplete data. For the FDA incomplete data are dropped but kept for the EMA.

Dif-tor heh smusma 🖖
Helmut Schütz

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

Complete thread:

 Admin contact
21,419 posts in 4,475 threads, 1,509 registered users;
online 10 (0 registered, 10 guests [including 4 identified bots]).
Forum time: Monday 02:09 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

There is one certainty in drug development
and statistics that one can depend on:
the data are always late.    Scott Patterson and Byron Jones

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