Increased variability [GxP / QC / QA]

posted by ElMaestro  – Denmark, 2021-09-17 20:51 (625 d 04:51 ago) – Posting: # 22586
Views: 4,298

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
22,616 posts in 4,740 threads, 1,613 registered users;
20 visitors (0 registered, 20 guests [including 14 identified bots]).
Forum time: 01:42 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

Biostatistician. One who has neither the intellect for mathematics
nor the commitment for medicine but likes to dabble in both.    Stephen Senn

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