Increased variability [GxP / QC / QA]

posted by ElMaestro  – Denmark, 2021-09-17 20:51 (976 d 16:23 ago) – Posting: # 22586
Views: 6,148

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
23,034 posts in 4,835 threads, 1,647 registered users;
29 visitors (0 registered, 29 guests [including 5 identified bots]).
Forum time: 13:14 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

Give me a fruitful error any time, full of seeds, bursting with its own corrections.
You can keep your sterile truth for yourself.    Vilfredo Pareto

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