Log in
Register|
vezz ☆ Erba (CO), Italy, 2010-02-02 13:59 (5978 d 22:58 ago) Posting: # 4693 Views: 3,932 |
|
|
Dear All, I'm working on a study aiming at evaluating the absolute bioavailability (BA) of an inhaled drug. I suppose that the approach to assess absolute BA is the same as for evaluating comparative BA (i.e., bioequivalence): the AUCs are compared based on an ANOVA model (please note: the same dose is inhaled and administered i.v.). However, in several papers I found absolute BA calculated for each subject (usually reported as F) and summarized using descriptive statistics. In my opinion this second approach may be useful to provide some support to the result obtained using the ANOVA, but it can not be considered as the analysis of primary interest. I would like to know your opinion about this point. Thank you very much for your help. — Kind regards, Stefano |
|
Helmut ★★★   Vienna, Austria, 2010-02-07 00:13 (5974 d 12:44 ago) @ vezz Posting: # 4725 Views: 3,039 |
|
|
Dear Stefano! ❝ the AUCs are compared based on an ANOVA model... Right. PE, confidence interval, end of story. ❝ However, in several papers I found absolute BA calculated for each subject ❝ (usually reported as F) and summarized using descriptive statistics. IMHO this would only make sense for a balanced study to have a 'quick look' on the geometric mean. If the study was imbalanced this value may be misleading. ❝ In my opinion this second approach may be useful to provide some support to ❝ the result obtained using the ANOVA, but it can not be considered as the ❝ analysis of primary interest. I do not see how this would support the result of a statistical model. I would say it's redundant at the best. — Dif-tor heh smusma 🖖🏼 Довге життя Україна! ![[image]](https://static.bebac.at/pics/Blue_and_yellow_ribbon_UA.png) Helmut Schütz ![[image]](https://static.bebac.at/img/CC by.png) The quality of responses received is directly proportional to the quality of the question asked. 🚮 Science Quotes |
Ing. Helmut Schütz