InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

georgejjl

02/09/24 3:25 PM

#451528 RE: frrol #451526

frrol

You are WRONG!!!

Former banker like yourself should stay far from scientific and/or medical issues.

You better read the latest Anavex corporate presentation.

https://www.anavex.com/_files/ugd/850d88_8397a9fa5776403099e35a48780c1909.pdf

GOD bless,
Bullish
Bullish
icon url

Steady_T

02/09/24 3:39 PM

#451530 RE: frrol #451526

Good grief. I understand how to compute effect size etc. I also understand the consequences of high variability in scores resulting in a large standard deviation.

And there is a real possibility that a larger n in the placebo arm might have reduced the standard deviation and perhaps the mean.
Random selection has some issues especially when the n of the selected population is small. The smaller the n the likelihood that the selected population is less representative of the overall population. 30 is considered to be the smallest n that is normally used with the common statistical tools. An n less that 30 usually require the use of different tools.

There are both type 1 and type 2 errors.
icon url

BIOChecker4

02/09/24 4:07 PM

#451536 RE: frrol #451526

frrol - Excellent, well-reasoned post. It’s a given that a much larger trial is going to be necessary. Whether it can be accomplished and in what time frame are open questions. Based on rather sorry history of Anavex’s timelines to complete trials we’re probably looking at 3 years or so, if at all, given that the number of treatment-naive patients is dwindling as Trofinetide continues to penetrate the market.

Thanks for your valued contributions.

DOG bless,