Proposed changes [Two-Stage / GS Designs]

posted by Mauricio Sampaio  – Brazil, 2020-02-17 14:50 (1554 d 14:14 ago) – Posting: # 21177
Views: 6,054

❝ Consequences for the Consulta Pública N° 760.


Instead of: "Type I error must be preserved and adjusted, and to demonstrate bioequivalence the level of confidence is 94.12%;"

I will only propose that: It must be demonstrated that the type I error of the study is controlled.

Instead of: "This second group must have at least 50% of the previous group"

I will propose that: The number of participants in the second stage must be calculated based on the data extracted from the first stage. The calculation must be justified considering possible losses and / or dropouts observed in the first stage.

In this way, the dialogue is open and not restricted. = "on top of the wall"

[image]


Edit: Subject line changed; see also this post #2. [Helmut]

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,033 posts in 4,835 threads, 1,647 registered users;
34 visitors (0 registered, 34 guests [including 3 identified bots]).
Forum time: 06:05 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

Give me a fruitful error any time, full of seeds, bursting with its own corrections.
You can keep your sterile truth for yourself.    Vilfredo Pareto

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