ABEL: Type I Error [RSABE / ABEL]

posted by Helmut Homepage – Vienna, Austria, 2020-09-28 17:12 (307 d 15:46 ago) – Posting: # 21947
Views: 778

Dear all,

we know for a good while that under certain conditions the type I error might be inflated. However, seemingly European assessors were either not aware of it or ignored it. Last week I saw a deficiency letter (don’t ask for the country):

… in case of a value of 30% < CVRR <45%, it is recommended to check the control of the patient's risk type I error at the level of 5%. If an alpha adjustment is necessary, it is recommended that a BE estimate for the new CI of the T/R ratio be submitted to meet the extended bounds.

Kudos! Almost correct. The area of inflated TIEs may reach below 30% and only rarely (say, for a 4-period full replicate in 24 subjects) to 45%.

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
21,596 posts in 4,516 threads, 1,532 registered users;
online 8 (0 registered, 8 guests [including 2 identified bots]).
Forum time: Monday 08:59 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

Imagine if every Thursday your shoes exploded
if you tied them the usual way.
This happens to us all the time with computers,
and nobody thinks of complaining.    Jef Raskin

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