CI inclusion ≠ TOST [Regulatives / Guidelines]

posted by ElMaestro  – Denmark, 2020-12-05 16:49 (136 d 18:25 ago) – Posting: # 22118
Views: 1,246

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:

Activity
 Admin contact
21,419 posts in 4,475 threads, 1,510 registered users;
online 13 (0 registered, 13 guests [including 5 identified bots]).
Forum time: Wednesday 12:14 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

In the Middles Ages the lingua franca of science was Latin.
Nowadays the language of science is bad English.    Anonymous

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