OT [Power / Sample Size]

posted by d_labes  – Berlin, Germany, 2022-01-31 19:48 (840 d 15:31 ago) – Posting: # 22764
Views: 1,838

Dear Anders,

❝ ...

❝ We started out with the good old work horse, the 222BE design with plain average BE. Great for many things.

❝ But "hey, poor me", said the Sponsor, "now I need 326 subjects in my trial for Schützoycin tablets. I demand an easier approach!".

❝ Then regulators meditated 10 years and held conference all the while and at some point it looked like average BE was being scrapped and fancy things like Pop BE and Individual BE were winning the crowd. But when the smoke had cleared average BE was still standing ...

what a sparkling gem of literature! Kudos :clap:

I highly recommend you to change your profession to be a dime novelist or a ghost writer of love letters for scientists, especially such working on the field of bioequivalence or similar nonsens :-D



Complete thread:

UA Flag
 Admin contact
23,034 posts in 4,835 threads, 1,647 registered users;
33 visitors (0 registered, 33 guests [including 5 identified bots]).
Forum time: 12:20 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