Log in
Registerstatistical significance ≠ clinical relevance [Study Assessment]
Thank you Helmut,
So the point is under the circumstance that I mentioned, the bioequivalence is still valid but the clinical relevance may need justification. Am I right?
So the point is under the circumstance that I mentioned, the bioequivalence is still valid but the clinical relevance may need justification. Am I right?
Complete thread:
- Robustness of bioequivalence when 90%CI doesn’t include 1 Darborn 2025-12-23 08:55 [Study Assessment]
![[Mix]](https://static.bebac.at/img/mix.png "open in Mix view")
- statistical significance ≠ clinical relevance Helmut 2025-12-23 13:52
- statistical significance ≠ clinical relevanceDarborn 2025-12-24 01:07
- Δ (20% in general) Helmut 2025-12-24 09:59
- statistical significance ≠ clinical relevanceDarborn 2025-12-24 01:07
- statistical significance ≠ clinical relevance Helmut 2025-12-23 13:52
Ing. Helmut Schütz