260 likes | 423 Views
Sample Size. Annie Herbert Medical Statistician Research & Development Support Unit Salford Royal Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust annie.herbert@manchester.ac.uk 0161 206 4567. Timetable. Outline. When are sample size calculations necessary? Single proportions Two proportions Two means
E N D
Sample Size Annie Herbert Medical Statistician Research & Development Support Unit Salford Royal Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust annie.herbert@manchester.ac.uk 0161 206 4567
Outline • When are sample size calculations necessary? • Single proportions • Two proportions • Two means • Other situations • Practical implications • Useful references
Why is it important to consider sample size? • To have a high chance of detecting a clinically important treatment effect if it exists. • To ensure appropriate precision of estimates. • To avoid wasting resources and the time of participants. • To avoid misleading conclusions.
When is a sample size calculation not necessary? • Truly qualitative research. • Pilot studies that will be used to inform larger studies (and not make conclusions).
Example 1: Population studies, single proportion (1) What is the prevalence of dysfunctional breathing amongst asthma patients in general practice? (Thomas et al, BMJ 2001) Results: Sample proportion of those suffering from dysfunctional breathing and a confidence interval for this proportion.
Population studies, single proportion (2) Primary outcome variable: Binary Required information: 1) Estimate of what proportion will be, (if rate totally unknown pick 50% as most conservative estimate). 2) Size of population if population small, e.g., < 20,000. 3) Acceptable deviation from this population estimate, (half width of confidence interval).
Statement for Protocol (1) • Include all figures that you’ve inputted into the calculation. • Possibly add statement about response rate/drop out. • Name the person who did the sample size calculation and any software. • E.g., ‘A sample of 324 patients will be required to obtain a 95% confidence interval of +/- 5% around a prevalence of approximately 30%. This was calculated by the PI using StatsDirect. We expect that 60% of those who we approach will agree to take part and as this is a questionnaire-based study that there’ll be next to no drop-outs, so we intend to approach 540 patients.’
Example 2: Comparing two proportions (1) Study: RCT comparing the effectiveness of colony-stimulating factors (CSFs) in reducing sepsis in premature babies. Results: Rate of sepsis at 2 weeks in CSF group and Placebo group, difference between these two proportions, confidence interval for this difference.
Comparing two proportions (2) Primary outcome variable: Binary. Required information: 1) Estimate of proportion in each group (difference is clinically important). 2) Power. 3) Significance level. 4) Treatment:Control ratio (often 1:1).
Definitions (1) • ‘Effect Size’ • What do you expect to see? • What has been seen previously? • What is a clinically important difference? • ‘Power’ • Probability of detecting a clinically important effect, if it exists. • Typically 80%, 90%.
Definitions (2) • ‘Significance Level’ • Cut-off level at which you would say a p-value is significant/non-significant. • Probability of concluding that there is a statistically significant difference in the sample when there is in fact no true difference in the population. • Typically 5%. • Should be set lower if multiple statistical tests have been planned.
Statement for Protocol (2) Comparing two proportions: E.g., ‘A sample size of at least 149 patients per group is required to be able to detect an absolute difference of 16% (50% vs. 34%) in the rate of sepsis between groups with 80% power, at 5% significance level’.
Example 3: Comparing two means (1) A RCT to evaluate a brief psychological intervention in comparison to usual treatment in the reduction of suicidal ideation. (Guthrie et al, BMJ 2001) ‘Suicidal ideation will be measured on the Beck scale; the standard deviation of this scale in a previous study was 7.7, and a difference of 5 points is considered to be of clinical importance.’ Results: Mean reduction in Beck score in the Intervention group and Usual Treatment group, difference between these two means, confidence interval for this difference.
Comparing two means (2) Primary outcome variable: Numerical Required information: • Estimate of standard deviation of primary outcome variable. • Effect size (difference in means). • Power. • Significance level. • Treatment:Control ratio.
Where to find an estimate of the standard deviation: • Pilot study. • Though note standard deviations on very small numbers may be imprecise. • Previous studies. • In-house data. • Rough estimate: Quarter of the range of ‘usual’ values.
Statement for Protocol (3) Comparing two means: E.g., ‘A sample size of at least 39 patients per group is required to be able to detect a difference in mean Beck score of 5 points or more with 80% power at 5% significance level. This is assuming a standard deviation of 7.7 for the Beck scale.
Things to Note • Power is linked to effect size. • All trials have an infinite number of powers! • Post-hoc power calculations are pointless. • Power conveyed by confidence interval. • If secondary outcomes are important separate sample size calculations should be done for these too. • The largest size resulting from these calculations should be used so powerful enough for all analyses.
Other Situations • More than 2 groups. • Non-randomised studies, e.g. Case-Control. • Equivalence trials. • Paired data, e.g., crossover, before/after trial. • Time-to-event data. • Cluster-randomised studies. • Diagnosis studies.
Sample size calculations in practice: • Often look at a range of assumptions. • Best case/worst case scenario. • Balance between ideal statistical power, resources and time. • Bear in mind only ¼ may consent (or lower). • Interim/sub-group analyses. • Seek advice and adjust p-values, etc. accordingly. • Issues of power should not overshadow issues of quality.
Useful References • Sample size calculations in randomised trials: mandatory and mystical. Schulz & Grimes, The Lancet 2005; 365 • An Introduction to Medical Statistics. Bland, M, OUP 2000 • Sample size calculations for clinical studies. Machin, Campbel, Fayers & Pinol, Blackwells