On CI calculation, untransformed metrics [General Sta­tis­tics]

posted by ElMaestro  – Denmark, 2019-11-29 03:40 (416 d 13:43 ago) – Posting: # 20893
Views: 2,415

Hi all,

I never did much work on untransformed metrics for BE calculation, but I am facing a situation where it is mandated by an authority, and what I need is the CI for the ratio (not per se the difference). I'd like to be well prepared.

A relevant publication, at least for sample size, is Hauschke et al. from 1999.

The ratio of two normal distributions is not itself a normal distribution. How is the calculation of the CI for the ratio actually done when the upper and lower limits are percentages of mu(R) ?

I think Hauschke's paper is silent on the matter, as is Chow & Liu.

Note also that powerTOST's nomenclature seems to differ a bit (?) from Hauschke's in that it uses theta1 and theta2 where Hauscke would use f1 and f2. In powerTOST theta1 defaults to 0.8 when the limit for the ratio is actually 0.8*mu(R), or so I am reading it. I may be quite wrong?!?

Anyhow, the important part of this post is how the CI for the ratio is actually derived.

Pass or fail!
ElMaestro

Complete thread:

Activity
 Admin contact
21,303 posts in 4,441 threads, 1,487 registered users;
online 9 (0 registered, 9 guests [including 2 identified bots]).
Forum time: Monday 17:24 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