CI inclusion ≠ TOST [BE/BA News]

posted by ElMaestro  – Denmark, 2020-12-05 17:49 (790 d 18:30 ago) – Posting: # 22118
Views: 2,980

Haha,

❝ if the CI inclusion rule is really something different than TOST why do we calculate power / samplesize based on TOST :confused:.


d_labes, you beat me to it, I was going to ask a similar question. :-D

If I am getting it right this isn't about whether your product passes the test for BE or not, it is purely a matter relating to what you call it. Since semantics is now of such importance, I believe PowerTOST needs to be renamed.:cool:

Now someone kindly define robust and robustness for me so that I understand it. And please tell me how to use that definition to make a simulation robust enough that it convinces WHO :-)
Or more generally, if I want to present an argument to a WHO regulator (not a simulation but just an argument which may or may not be based on siumulation) in which way will I know away to make my argument robust?

Pass or fail!
ElMaestro

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
22,478 posts in 4,708 threads, 1,604 registered users;
10 visitors (0 registered, 10 guests [including 7 identified bots]).
Forum time: 12:19 CET (Europe/Vienna)

If you don’t like something change it;
if you can’t change it, change the way you think about it.    Mary Engelbreit

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