90% CIs for BE? [🇷 for BE/BA]

posted by ElMaestro  – Denmark, 2008-11-17 20:49 (6060 d 12:05 ago) – Posting: # 2700
Views: 13,280

Dear Yung-jin,

it really sounds interesting if FDA will be using Pharsight's software.
Did I really write interesting?? I of course meant horrible!

Remember the type III discussion? There is not agreement about them among statisticians but since FDA published source scripts based on SAS (which uses type III SS by default) they have somehow become a de facto standard.
I could easily imagine a similar phenomenon will reveal itself with Pharsight's software. PK analyses in the world's companies then will be a struggle to reproduce the output of WinNonlin etc rather than a scientific exercise that strives to do it properly.

EM.

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,424 posts in 4,927 threads, 1,671 registered users;
38 visitors (0 registered, 38 guests [including 6 identified bots]).
Forum time: 09:55 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

Medical researches can be divided into two sorts:
those who think that meta is better and those
who believe that pooling is fooling.    Stephen Senn

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