Dataset Information

Conservative Sample Size Determination for Repeated Measures Analysis of Covariance.

ABSTRACT: In the design of a randomized clinical trial with one pre and multiple post randomized assessments of the outcome variable, one needs to account for the repeated measures in determining the appropriate sample size. Unfortunately, one seldom has a good estimate of the variance of the outcome measure, let alone the correlations among the measurements over time. We show how sample sizes can be calculated by making conservative assumptions regarding the correlations for a variety of covariance structures. The most conservative choice for the correlation depends on the covariance structure and the number of repeated measures. In the absence of good estimates of the correlations, the sample size is often based on a two-sample t-test, making the 'ultra' conservative and unrealistic assumption that there are zero correlations between the baseline and follow-up measures while at the same time assuming there are perfect correlations between the follow-up measures. Compared to the case of taking a single measurement, substantial savings in sample size can be realized by accounting for the repeated measures, even with very conservative assumptions regarding the parameters of the assumed correlation matrix. Assuming compound symmetry, the sample size from the two-sample t-test calculation can be reduced at least 44%, 56%, and 61% for repeated measures analysis of covariance by taking 2, 3, and 4 follow-up measures, respectively. The results offer a rational basis for determining a fairly conservative, yet efficient, sample size for clinical trials with repeated measures and a baseline value.

SUBMITTER: Morgan TM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4100335 | biostudies-literature | 2013 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Conservative Sample Size Determination for Repeated Measures Analysis of Covariance.

Morgan Timothy M TM Case L Douglas LD

Annals of biometrics & biostatistics 20130701 1

In the design of a randomized clinical trial with one pre and multiple post randomized assessments of the outcome variable, one needs to account for the repeated measures in determining the appropriate sample size. Unfortunately, one seldom has a good estimate of the variance of the outcome measure, let alone the correlations among the measurements over time. We show how sample sizes can be calculated by making conservative assumptions regarding the correlations for a variety of covariance struc ...[more]

PMID: 25045756

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND: Research for developing search strategies to retrieve high-quality clinical journal articles from MEDLINE is expensive and time-consuming. The objective of this study was to determine the minimal number of high-quality articles in a journal subset that would need to be hand-searched to update or create new MEDLINE search strategies for treatment, diagnosis, and prognosis studies. METHODS: The desired width of the 95% confidence intervals (W) for the lowest sensitivity among existing search strategies was used to calculate the number of high-quality articles needed to reliably update search strategies. New search strategies were derived in journal subsets formed by 2 approaches: random sampling of journals and top journals (having the most high-quality articles). The new strategies were tested in both the original large journal database and in a low-yielding journal (having few high-quality articles) subset. RESULTS: For treatment studies, if W was 10% or less for the lowest sensitivity among our existing search strategies, a subset of 15 randomly selected journals or 2 top journals were adequate for updating search strategies, based on each approach having at least 99 high-quality articles. The new strategies derived in 15 randomly selected journals or 2 top journals performed well in the original large journal database. Nevertheless, the new search strategies developed using the random sampling approach performed better than those developed using the top journal approach in a low-yielding journal subset. For studies of diagnosis and prognosis, no journal subset had enough high-quality articles to achieve the expected W (10%). CONCLUSION: The approach of randomly sampling a small subset of journals that includes sufficient high-quality articles is an efficient way to update or create search strategies for high-quality articles on therapy in MEDLINE. The concentrations of diagnosis and prognosis articles are too low for this approach.

Dataset Information

Conservative Sample Size Determination for Repeated Measures Analysis of Covariance.

Publications

Conservative Sample Size Determination for Repeated Measures Analysis of Covariance.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets