Increased variability [GxP / QC / QA]

posted by ElMaestro  – Denmark, 2021-09-17 18:51 (251 d 19:57 ago) – Posting: # 22586
Views: 2,519

Hi all,

» » The CVs calculated from the confidence intervals in both ‘parts’ are much lower than the ones in the ‘full’ study. Or the other way ’round: If we pool the CVs of the ‘parts’ we could expect values which are lower than the ‘observed’ (tee-hee!) ones.

Correctly observed. And for exactly those reasons it makes very good sense to plot for example the RMSE, CV, SE of diff., or even the width of the CI as function of (cumulated) number of subjects.

It is not so difficult. :-)

Pass or fail!
ElMaestro

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
22,108 posts in 4,630 threads, 1,567 registered users;
online 5 (0 registered, 5 guests [including 3 identified bots]).
Forum time: Friday 14:48 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

We absolutely must leave room for doubt
or there is no progress and no learning.
There is no learning without having to pose a question.
And a question requires doubt.
People search for certainty.
But there is no certainty.    Richard Feynman

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