↓ Skip to main content

A sample size planning approach that considers both statistical significance and clinical significance

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
10 X users

Readers on

mendeley
42 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A sample size planning approach that considers both statistical significance and clinical significance
Published in
Trials, May 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13063-015-0727-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bin Jia, Henry S Lynn

Abstract

The CONSORT statement requires clinical trials to report confidence intervals, which help to assess the precision and clinical importance of the treatment effect. Conventional sample size calculations for clinical trials, however, only consider issues of statistical significance (that is, significance level and power). A more consistent approach is proposed whereby sample size planning also incorporates information on clinical significance as indicated by the boundaries of the confidence limits of the treatment effect. The probabilities of declaring a "definitive-positive" or "definitive-negative" result (as defined by Guyatt et al., CMAJ 152(2):169-173, 1995) are controlled by calculating the sample size such that the lower confidence limit under H 1 and the upper confidence limit under H 0 are bounded by relevant cut-offs. Adjustments to the traditional sample size can be directly derived for the comparison of two normally distributed means in a test of nonequality, while simulations are used to estimate the sample size for evaluating the hazards ratio in a proportional-hazards model. This sample size planning approach allows for an assessment of the potential clinical importance and precision of the treatment effect in a clinical trial in addition to considerations of statistical power and type I error.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 5%
United Kingdom 1 2%
Canada 1 2%
Unknown 38 90%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 14%
Other 5 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 10%
Researcher 4 10%
Other 9 21%
Unknown 5 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 33%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 17%
Engineering 4 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 7%
Neuroscience 2 5%
Other 8 19%
Unknown 4 10%