from Potvin C to Inverse Normal [Two-Stage / GS Designs]

posted by mittyri – Russia, 2022-06-27 19:13 (756 d 08:32 ago) – Posting: # 23096
Views: 2,452

Dear Helmut,

❝ In principle yes but I received a few deficiency letters asking for a “post hoc assessement of the Type I Error”. That’s not well-thought-out. Of course, we know n1 but the CV is just an estimate. The true one (used in the simulations of the framework) is unknown.


Fully agree! This thread was started due to deficiency letter my friend showed me some time ago. I thought I missed something in TSD, but now I see a full picture

❝ Consider to avoid this stuff in the future. See this post and followings for better alternatives.


there are zero papers I've seen by Russian experts regarding inverse normal method. I guess this is the reason why the sponsors do not want to have a risk with that invention. "Why should we care if everything works with Potvin?"

Kind regards,
Mittyri

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,113 posts in 4,858 threads, 1,644 registered users;
42 visitors (0 registered, 42 guests [including 10 identified bots]).
Forum time: 03:45 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

You can’t really say “similar” if it’s the same again you want.
“Similar” means something different.    Anthony Burgess

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