176 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 1601533)
1. Sample size determination: extended tables for the multiplicative model and bioequivalence ranges of 0.9 to 1.11 and 0.7 to 1.43.
Diletti E; Hauschke D; Steinijans VW
Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther Toxicol; 1992; 30 Suppl 1():S59-62. PubMed ID: 1601533
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Sample size determination: extended tables for the multiplicative model and bioequivalence ranges of 0.9 to 1.11 and 0.7 to 1.43.
Diletti E; Hauschke D; Steinijans VW
Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther Toxicol; 1992 Aug; 30(8):287-90. PubMed ID: 1526691
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Sample size determination for bioequivalence assessment by means of confidence intervals.
Diletti E; Hauschke D; Steinijans VW
Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther Toxicol; 1992; 30 Suppl 1():S51-8. PubMed ID: 1601532
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Sample size determination for bioequivalence assessment by means of confidence intervals.
Diletti E; Hauschke D; Steinijans VW
Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther Toxicol; 1991 Jan; 29(1):1-8. PubMed ID: 2004861
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Update on the statistical analysis of bioequivalence studies.
Steinijans VW; Hauschke D
Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther Toxicol; 1992; 30 Suppl 1():S45-50. PubMed ID: 1601531
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. A distribution-free procedure for the statistical analysis of bioequivalence studies.
Hauschke D; Steinijans VW; Diletti E
Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther Toxicol; 1992; 30 Suppl 1():S37-43. PubMed ID: 1601530
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Update on the statistical analysis of bioequivalence studies.
Steinijans VW; Hauschke D
Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther Toxicol; 1990 Mar; 28(3):105-10. PubMed ID: 2318545
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. A distribution-free procedure for the statistical analysis of bioequivalence studies.
Hauschke D; Steinijans VW; Diletti E
Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther Toxicol; 1990 Feb; 28(2):72-8. PubMed ID: 2307548
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Effect of changing the bioequivalence range from (0.80, 1.20) to (0.80, 1.25) on the power and sample size.
Steinijans VW; Hauck WW; Diletti E; Hauschke D; Anderson S
Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther Toxicol; 1992 Dec; 30(12):571-5. PubMed ID: 1473872
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. A two one-sided tests procedure for assessment of individual bioequivalence.
Liu J; Chow SC
J Biopharm Stat; 1997 Mar; 7(1):49-61. PubMed ID: 9056588
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Sample size determination for assessing equivalence based on proportion ratio under a randomized trial with non-compliance and missing outcomes.
Lui KJ; Chang KC
Stat Med; 2008 Jan; 27(1):47-67. PubMed ID: 17708514
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Lack of pharmacokinetic interaction as an equivalence problem.
Steinijans VW; Hartmann M; Huber R; Radtke HW
Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther Toxicol; 1992; 30 Suppl 1():S63-8. PubMed ID: 1601534
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Optimum allocation of treatments for Welch's test in equivalence assessment.
Dette H; Munk A
Biometrics; 1997 Sep; 53(3):1143-50. PubMed ID: 9333344
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. On TIER method for assessment of individual bioequivalence.
Ju HL
J Biopharm Stat; 1997 Mar; 7(1):63-85. PubMed ID: 9056589
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. A simple formula for sample size calculation in equivalence studies.
Zhang P
J Biopharm Stat; 2003 Aug; 13(3):529-38. PubMed ID: 12921399
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Robust and bootstrap testing procedures for bioequivalence.
Shen CF; Iglewicz B
J Biopharm Stat; 1994 Mar; 4(1):65-90. PubMed ID: 8019585
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Assessment of bioequivalence using a multiplicative model.
Chow SC; Peace KE; Shao J
J Biopharm Stat; 1991; 1(2):193-203. PubMed ID: 1844696
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Equivalence tests for interchangeability based on two one-sided probabilities.
Dong X; Tsong Y; Shen M
J Biopharm Stat; 2014; 24(6):1332-48. PubMed ID: 25033074
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Some issues in the design and interpretation of 'negative' clinical studies.
Makuch RW; Johnson MF
Arch Intern Med; 1986 May; 146(5):986-9. PubMed ID: 3963987
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Bioequivalence and intrasubject variability.
Liu JP
J Biopharm Stat; 1991; 1(2):205-19. PubMed ID: 1844697
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
