ABEL ≠ RSABE [Outliers]

posted by BEQool  – 2023-10-09 16:47 (340 d 03:39 ago) – Posting: # 23747
Views: 3,283

Hello!

I have seen this or similar explanation several times:

❝ If you design studies for 80% power and all of your assumptions are exactly realized (T/R-ratio, CV, dropout-rate), one out of five will fail be pure chance. That’s life.


... but I still can't get my head around this.

Lets say I plan study with theta0=0.95, CV=0.20, design="2x2", targetpower=0.8 (all except CV are default settings in PowerTOST), so with sampleN.TOST I get N=20 and power=0.834680
> sampleN.TOST(theta0=0.95, CV=0.20, design="2x2", targetpower=0.8, print=FALSE)
  Design alpha  CV theta0 theta1 theta2 Sample size Achieved power Target power
    2x2  0.05   0.2  0.95    0.8   1.25          20      0.8346802          0.8


If all of my assumptions in a study are exactly realized, doesnt it mean that I would 100% always get bioequivalent formulations (and the study would never fail)?
If all of my assumptions in a study are exactly realized (pe=0.95, CV=0.20, design="2x2", n=20) then I would get the following confidence interval:
> CI.BE(pe=0.95,CV=0.20,n=20)
    lower     upper
0.8522362 1.0589787


So because a confidence interval is completely within limits 80-125%, my formulations would always be bioequivalent because I would always get this confidence interval with same numbers (CV,n,pe)?

What am I not understanding here?
Thank you and best regards
BEQool

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,224 posts in 4,878 threads, 1,654 registered users;
34 visitors (0 registered, 34 guests [including 5 identified bots]).
Forum time: 20:27 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

One of the symptoms of an approaching nervous breakdown
is the belief that one’s work is terribly important.    Bertrand Russell

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