Understanding Equivalence and Noninferiority Testing

By Esteban Walker, A. Nowacki. 2011

726 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Computational Theory and Mathematics, Pharmacology, Statistics and Probability

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Computational Theory and Mathematics

1. Siddharth Garg
2. Ramesh Karri
3. John K. Kruschke
4. Hammond A. Pearce
5. Milica Miočević
6. R. van de Schoot

In Pharmacology

1. John K. Kruschke
2. Milica Miočević
3. R. van de Schoot

In Statistics and Probability

1. R. van de Schoot
2. Milica Miočević
3. John K. Kruschke
4. Zoltan Dienes
5. Paul-Christian Burkner
6. Andrew Gelman
7. David M. Blei
8. Daniël Lakens

Citations in the corpus

• Lost at C: A User Study on the Security Implications of Large Language Model Code Assistants (2022, methodology): “For side effects, non-inferiority tests are used—the test seeks to establish that the side effects are within a “maximum clinically acceptable difference” that one is willing to tolerate [49].”
• Rejecting or Accepting Parameter Values in Bayesian Estimation (2018, background): “Walker and Nowacki (2011) explained that one conventional setting of the noninferiority limit is at half of “the lower limit of a confidence interval of the difference between the current therapy and the placebo obtained from a metaanalysis” (p. 194).”
• Small Sample Size Solutions (2020, methodology): “A frequentist approach to this replication research question is the equivalence test (e.g., Walker & Nowacki, 2011).”