CI inclusion operationally identical to TOST [Regulatives / Guidelines]

posted by d_labes  – Berlin, Germany, 2020-12-07 11:11 (48 d 01:27 ago) – Posting: # 22120
Views: 663

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.



Complete thread:

 Admin contact
21,310 posts in 4,445 threads, 1,489 registered users;
online 2 (0 registered, 2 guests [including 2 identified bots]).
Forum time: Sunday 12:39 CET (Europe/Vienna)

Every man gets a narrower and narrower field of knowledge
in which he must be an expert in order to compete with other people.
The specialist knows more and more about less and less
and finally knows everything about nothing.    Konrad Lorenz

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