Literature DB >> 18450060

Power and sample size.

L Douglas Case1, Walter T Ambrosius.   

Abstract

In this chapter, we discuss the concept of statistical power and show how the sample size can be chosen to ensure a desired power. Power is the probability of rejecting the null hypothesis when the null hypothesis is false, that is the probability of saying there is a difference when a difference actually exists. An underpowered study does not have a sufficiently large sample size to answer the research question of interest. An overpowered study has too large a sample size and wastes resources. We will show how the power and required sample size can be calculated for several common types of studies, mention software that can be used for the necessary calculations, and discuss additional considerations.

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 18450060     DOI: 10.1007/978-1-59745-530-5_19

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Methods Mol Biol        ISSN: 1064-3745


  6 in total

1.  Biomarkers for noninvasive biochemical diagnosis of nonalcoholic steatohepatitis: tools or decorations?

Authors:  Yusuf Yilmaz; Enver Dolar
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2009-09-14       Impact factor: 5.742

2.  Student t-tests for potentially abnormal data.

Authors:  Jonathan J Shuster
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2009-07-20       Impact factor: 2.373

3.  Sample size, power and effect size revisited: simplified and practical approaches in pre-clinical, clinical and laboratory studies.

Authors:  Ceyhan Ceran Serdar; Murat Cihan; Doğan Yücel; Muhittin A Serdar
Journal:  Biochem Med (Zagreb)       Date:  2020-12-15       Impact factor: 2.313

4.  What makes online teaching spatial? Examining the connections between K-12 teachers' spatial skills, affect, and their use of spatial pedagogy during remote instruction.

Authors:  Kelsey Rocha; Catherine M Lussier; Kinnari Atit
Journal:  Cogn Res Princ Implic       Date:  2022-03-21

5.  Bicycle helmet wearing is not associated with close motor vehicle passing: a re-analysis of Walker, 2007.

Authors:  Jake Olivier; Scott R Walter
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-09-25       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 6.  Comparing the use of patient-reported outcomes in clinical studies in Europe in 2008 and 2018: a literature review.

Authors:  Guro Lindviksmoen Astrup; Gudrun Rohde; Stein Arne Rimehaug; Marit Helen Andersen; Tomm Bernklev; Kristin Bjordal; Ragnhild Sørum Falk; Nina Marie Høyning Jørgensen; Knut Stavem; Anita Tollisen; Cecilie Delphin Amdal
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2021-08-04       Impact factor: 4.147

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.