CI inclusion operationally identical to TOST [BE/BA News]

posted by d_labes  – Berlin, Germany, 2020-12-07 12:11 (728 d 02:49 ago) – Posting: # 22120
Views: 2,834

Dear Helmut,

❝ ...

❝ Given, Donald used the phrase “operationally identical” on p.661 (right column, 2nd paragraph).


❝ However, for me (!) those are two different “operations”. Results of an example:

90% CI: lower CL = 0.8448

        upper CL = 1.1003

        CI within 0.8000 and 1.2500: passed BE

TOST  : p(<0.8000) = 0.01239

        p(>1.2500) = 0.001565

        p(<0.8000) <0.05 and p(>1.2500) <0.05: passed BE


Of course the two calculations are different, no doubt about it.

I have understood “operationally identical” always as the fact that TOST and CI inclusion give the same answer with regard to the BE decision.

IMHO this is the meaning of the paragraph on page 661 in Donalds famous paper containing “operationally identical”:
"The two one-sided tests procedure turns out to be operationally identical to the procedure of declaring equivalence only if the ordinary 1 - 2α (not 1-α) confidence interval for µT-µR is completely contained in the equivalence interval [θ1, θ2]".
Emphasis by me.

Regards,

Detlew

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
22,428 posts in 4,694 threads, 1,598 registered users;
16 visitors (0 registered, 16 guests [including 7 identified bots]).
Forum time: 15:01 CET (Europe/Vienna)

Statistics is the art of never having to say you’re wrong.
Variance is what any two statisticians are at.    C.J. Bradfield

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