New dataset? [🇷 for BE/BA]

posted by d_labes  – Berlin, Germany, 2010-05-05 13:40 (5479 d 13:31 ago) – Posting: # 5293
Views: 24,238

Dear Yung-jin,

if I look on your ANOVA results and the CIs I guess your single dose 2x2 cross-over dataset has changed?
Or is the difference solely due to rounding? :ponder:

IMHO it would be a very good idea to have the same demo datasets across the various versions. With that given one can make a short test of the reliability of bear results and we are talking always about the same numbers regardless which bear version we have currently installed (sometimes called backward compatibility :-D).

It would also a very good idea to have the same datasets regardless if we start from NCA or later with statistical evaluation, i.e. the concentration-time values of a demo dataset should correspond to the PK metrics used later.

BTW: I question your results! Full match of the results with log to full precision or with log rounded to 3 digits (after dec. separator), respectively, in the ANOVA's and the CI's up to the last printed digits has a probability of very near to zero.

Regards,

Detlew

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,424 posts in 4,927 threads, 1,672 registered users;
87 visitors (0 registered, 87 guests [including 6 identified bots]).
Forum time: 03:12 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

It’s always fun to have your models validated,
but is way more fun to have them trashed.
Finding out you are completely wrong
is a great part of science.    G. Randall Gladstone

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