Abstract
Performing well-powered randomized controlled trials is of fundamental importance in clinical research. The goal of sample size calculations is to assure that statistical power is acceptable while maintaining a small probability of a type I error. This chapter overviews the fundamentals of sample size calculation for standard types of outcomes for two-group studies. It considers (1) the problems of determining the size of the treatment effect that the studies will be designed to detect, (2) the modifications to sample size calculations to account for loss to follow-up and nonadherence, (3) the options when initial calculations indicate that the feasible sample size is insufficient to provide adequate power, and (4) the implication of using multiple primary endpoints. Sample size estimates for longitudinal cohort studies must take account of confounding by baseline factors.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Grimes DA, Schulz KF (2002) Bias and causal associations in observational research. Lancet 359(9302):248–252
Friedman LM, Furberg C, DeMets DL (1998) Fundamentals of clinical trials, vol 3. Springer, New York, pp 133–168
Birkett MA, Day SJ (1994) Internal pilot studies for estimating sample size. Stat Med 13(23–24):2455–2463
Ellis PD (2010) The essential guide to effect sizes: statistical power, meta-analysis, and the interpretation of research results. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, NY
Nakagawa S, Cuthill IC (2007) Effect size, confidence interval and statistical significance: a practical guide for biologists. Biol Rev 82(4):591–605
Lehmann EL, Romano JP (2006) Testing statistical hypotheses. Springer, New York
Ioannidis J, Greenland S, Hlatky MA, Khoury MJ, Macleod MR, Moher D, Schulz KF, Tibshirani R (2014) Increasing value and reducing waste in research design, conduct, and analysis. Lancet 383(9912):166–175
Geller G, Doksum T, Bernhardt BA, Metz SA (1999) Participation in breast cancer susceptibility testing protocols: influence of recruitment source, altruism, and family involvement on women’s decisions. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 8(4):377–383
Mattson ME, Curb JD, McArdle R (1985) Participation in a clinical trial: the patients’ point of view. Control Clin Trials 6(2):156–167
Newell D (1978) Type II errors and ethics. BMJ 2(6154):1789
Emanuel EJ, Wendler D, Grady C (2000) What makes clinical research ethical? JAMA 283(20):2701–2711
Halpern SD, Karlawish JH, Berlin JA (2002) The continuing unethical conduct of underpowered clinical trials. JAMA 288(3):358–362
Ioannidis JP (2005) Why most published research findings are false. PLoS Med 2(8):e124
Ioannidis JP (2005) Contradicted and initially stronger effects in highly cited clinical research. JAMA 294(2):218–228
Wacholder S, Chanock S, Garcia-Closas M, Rothman N (2004) Assessing the probability that a positive report is false: an approach for molecular epidemiology studies. J Natl Cancer Inst 96(6):434–442
Easterbrook PJ, Gopalan R, Berlin J, Matthews DR (1991) Publication bias in clinical research. Lancet 337(8746):867–872
Dickersin K (1990) The existence of publication bias and risk factors for its occurrence. JAMA 263(10):1385–1389
Goodman SN, Berlin JA (1994) The use of predicted confidence intervals when planning experiments and the misuse of power when interpreting results. Ann Intern Med 121(3):200–206
Simon R (1986) Confidence intervals for reporting results of clinical trials. Ann Int Med 105(3):429–435
Schulz KF, Grimes DA (2005) Sample size calculations in randomised trials: mandatory and mystical. Lancet 365(9467):1348–1353
Chalmers TC, Levin H, Sacks HS, Reitman D, Berrier J, Nagalingam R (1987) Meta‐analysis of clinical trials as a scientific discipline. I: control of bias and comparison with large co‐operative trials. Stat Med 6(3):315–325
Horton R, Smith R (1999) Time to register randomised trials: the case is now unanswerable. BMJ 319(7214):865
Bailar J 3rd (1997) The promise and problems of meta-analysis. New Engl J Med 337(8):559
Ghersi D, Berlin J, Askie L (2011) Chapter 19: prospective meta-analysis. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (eds) Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 5.1.0 (updated March 2011). The Cochrane Collaboration
Unit ES (2005) Efficacy and safety of cholesterol-lowering treatment: prospective meta-analysis of data from 90 056 participants in 14 randomised trials of statins. Lancet 366:1267–1278
Chow S-C, Wang H, Shao J (2007) Sample size calculations in clinical research. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL
Cohen J (1977) Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (rev.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc, Hillsdale, NJ
Machin D, Campbell MJ, Tan S-B, Tan S-H (2011) Sample size tables for clinical studies. Wiley, New York
Borm GF, Fransen J, Lemmens WA (2007) A simple sample size formula for analysis of covariance in randomized clinical trials. J Clin Epidemiol 60(12):1234–1238
Schlesselman JJ (1973) Planning a longitudinal study: I. Sample size determination. J Chron Dis 26(9):553–560
Schlesselman JJ (1973) Planning a longitudinal study: II. Frequency of measurement and study duration. J Chron Dis 26(9):561–570
Fleiss JL, Levin B, Paik MC (2013) Statistical methods for rates and proportions. Wiley, New York
Sims M, Elston DA, Harris MP, Wanless S (2007) Incorporating variance uncertainty into a power analysis of monitoring designs. J Agric Biolog Environ Stat 12(2):236–249
Friede T, Kieser M (2006) Sample size recalculation in internal pilot study designs: a review. Biom J 48(4):537–555
Wittes J, Brittain E (1990) The role of internal pilot studies in increasing the efficiency of clinical trials. Stat Med 9(1–2):65–72
Jaeschke R, Singer J, Guyatt GH (1989) Measurement of health status: ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference. Control Clin Trials 10(4):407–415
Fleming TR (2008) Current issues in non‐inferiority trials. Stat Med 27(3):317–332
Hung H, Wang SJ, O’Neill R (2005) A regulatory perspective on choice of margin and statistical inference issue in non‐inferiority trials. Biom J 47(1):28–36
Wittes J (2002) Sample size calculations for randomized controlled trials. Epidemiol Rev 24(1):39–53
Lakatos E, Lan K (1992) A comparison of sample size methods for the logrank statistic. Stat Med 11(2):179–191
Lakatos E (1988) Sample sizes based on the log-rank statistic in complex clinical trials. Biometrics 44:229–241
Treweek S, Zwarenstein M (2009) Making trials matter: pragmatic and explanatory trials and the problem of applicability. Trials 10(37):9
Cannon CP (1997) Clinical perspectives on the use of composite endpoints. Control Clin Trials 18(6):517–529
Freemantle N, Calvert M (2007) Weighing the pros and cons for composite outcomes in clinical trials. J Clin Epid 60(7):658–659
Hayes R, Bennett S (1999) Simple sample size calculation for cluster-randomized trials. Int J Epidemiol 28(2):319–326
Murray DM, Varnell SP, Blitstein JL (2004) Design and analysis of group-randomized trials: a review of recent methodological developments. Am J Pub Health 94(3):423
Pocock SJ (1997) Clinical trials with multiple outcomes: a statistical perspective on their design, analysis, and interpretation. Control Clin Trials 18(6):530–545
Tilley BC, Marler J, Geller NL, Lu M, Legler J, Brott T, Lyden P, Grotte J (1996) Use of a global test for multiple outcomes in stroke trials with application to the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke t-PA Stroke Trial. Stroke 27(11):2136–2142
Schoenfeld DA (1983) Sample-size formula for the proportional-hazards regression. Biometrics 39(2):499–503
Hsieh FY, Bloch DA, Larsen MD (1998) A simple method of sample size calculation for linear and logistic regression. Stat Med 17(14):1623–1634
Hsieh F, Lavori PW (2000) Sample-size calculations for the Cox proportional hazards regression model with nonbinary covariates. Control Clin Trials 21(6):552–560
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this protocol
Cite this protocol
Greene, T. (2015). Randomized Controlled Trials 5: Determining the Sample Size and Power for Clinical Trials and Cohort Studies. In: Parfrey, P., Barrett, B. (eds) Clinical Epidemiology. Methods in Molecular Biology, vol 1281. Humana Press, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-2428-8_13
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-2428-8_13
Published:
Publisher Name: Humana Press, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-1-4939-2427-1
Online ISBN: 978-1-4939-2428-8
eBook Packages: Springer Protocols