ABEL: Type I Error [RSABE / ABEL]

posted by Helmut Homepage – Vienna, Austria, 2020-09-28 19:12 (1690 d 12:20 ago) – Posting: # 21947
Views: 4,183

Dear all,

we know for a good while that under certain conditions the Type I Error (TIE) 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 🖖🏼 Довге життя Україна! [image]
Helmut Schütz
[image]

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

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,424 posts in 4,927 threads, 1,672 registered users;
202 visitors (0 registered, 202 guests [including 10 identified bots]).
Forum time: 07:33 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

A statistical analysis, properly conducted, is a delicate dissection of
uncertainties, a surgery of suppositions.    Micheal J. Moroney

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