Increased variability [GxP / QC / QA]

posted by ElMaestro  – Denmark, 2021-09-17 20:51 (951 d 01:36 ago) – Posting: # 22586
Views: 5,991

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
22,993 posts in 4,828 threads, 1,651 registered users;
151 visitors (0 registered, 151 guests [including 5 identified bots]).
Forum time: 22:27 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

Never never never never use Excel.
Not even for calculation of arithmetic means.    Martin Wolfsegger

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