Appropriateness is largely a matter of what the ultimate purpose of the
model is, and neither metric will be 'better' in all cases. Extrapolating
into a new population may require different evaluation diagnostics than
using a model to optimize the dose the observed population.
Given you only have trough samples, using a posterior predictive check on
trough levels or equivalence criteria such as proposed in:
Jadhav, P. R. & Gobburu, J. V. S. A new equivalence based metric for
predictive check to qualify mixed-effects models. *AAPS J* *7,* E523â€=
would likely work well.
Clinical Research Scientist, PhD student
Center for Translational Medicine
University of Maryland, School of Pharmacy
On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 10:38 AM ZhaoChenyan <zhaochenyanvictory_at_hotmail.co=
> Dear all:
> I'm now having a set of TDM data, only troughs ï¼ˆC0 ï¼‰ avai=
> I intend to evaluated the appropriateness of the constructed model.
> My question is whether to use pcVPC or NPDE as a diagnostic tool in such =
> Which one is better?
> Or to use them both, as suggested by Bergstrand et al.: "The best
> practice most likely lies in using a wide toolbox of diagnostics, rather
> than one single universal test to decide whether a model is fit for purpo=
> or not."
> Thank you in advance.
> Chenyan Zhao
> Email: *zhaochenyanvictory_at_**hotmail.com <http://hotmail.com>*
> Mobile: +86 13917430219
Received on Fri Sep 11 2015 - 10:45:52 EDT