Literature DB >> 25481494

Reporting of sample size calculations in analgesic clinical trials: ACTTION systematic review.

Andrew McKeown1, Jennifer S Gewandter1, Michael P McDermott2, Joseph R Pawlowski1, Joseph J Poli1, Daniel Rothstein1, John T Farrar3, Ian Gilron4, Nathaniel P Katz5, Allison H Lin6, Bob A Rappaport6, Michael C Rowbotham7, Dennis C Turk8, Robert H Dworkin9, Shannon M Smith10.   

Abstract

UNLABELLED: Sample size calculations determine the number of participants required to have sufficiently high power to detect a given treatment effect. In this review, we examined the reporting quality of sample size calculations in 172 publications of double-blind randomized controlled trials of noninvasive pharmacologic or interventional (ie, invasive) pain treatments published in European Journal of Pain, Journal of Pain, and Pain from January 2006 through June 2013. Sixty-five percent of publications reported a sample size calculation but only 38% provided all elements required to replicate the calculated sample size. In publications reporting at least 1 element, 54% provided a justification for the treatment effect used to calculate sample size, and 24% of studies with continuous outcome variables justified the variability estimate. Publications of clinical pain condition trials reported a sample size calculation more frequently than experimental pain model trials (77% vs 33%, P < .001) but did not differ in the frequency of reporting all required elements. No significant differences in reporting of any or all elements were detected between publications of trials with industry and nonindustry sponsorship. Twenty-eight percent included a discrepancy between the reported number of planned and randomized participants. This study suggests that sample size calculation reporting in analgesic trial publications is usually incomplete. Investigators should provide detailed accounts of sample size calculations in publications of clinical trials of pain treatments, which is necessary for reporting transparency and communication of pre-trial design decisions. PERSPECTIVE: In this systematic review of analgesic clinical trials, sample size calculations and the required elements (eg, treatment effect to be detected; power level) were incompletely reported. A lack of transparency regarding sample size calculations may raise questions about the appropriateness of the calculated sample size.
Copyright © 2015 American Pain Society. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Sample size; pain research; power

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25481494     DOI: 10.1016/j.jpain.2014.11.010

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Pain        ISSN: 1526-5900            Impact factor:   5.820


  7 in total

Review 1.  The Opioid Crisis and the Future of Addiction and Pain Therapeutics.

Authors:  Nathan P Coussens; G Sitta Sittampalam; Samantha G Jonson; Matthew D Hall; Heather E Gorby; Amir P Tamiz; Owen B McManus; Christian C Felder; Kurt Rasmussen
Journal:  J Pharmacol Exp Ther       Date:  2019-09-03       Impact factor: 4.030

Review 2.  Essential statistical principles of clinical trials of pain treatments.

Authors:  Robert H Dworkin; Scott R Evans; Omar Mbowe; Michael P McDermott
Journal:  Pain Rep       Date:  2020-12-18

3.  Research design considerations for randomized controlled trials of spinal cord stimulation for pain: Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials/Institute of Neuromodulation/International Neuromodulation Society recommendations.

Authors:  Nathaniel Katz; Robert H Dworkin; Richard North; Simon Thomson; Sam Eldabe; Salim M Hayek; Brian H Kopell; John Markman; Ali Rezai; Rod S Taylor; Dennis C Turk; Eric Buchser; Howard Fields; Gregory Fiore; McKenzie Ferguson; Jennifer Gewandter; Chris Hilker; Roshini Jain; Angela Leitner; John Loeser; Ewan McNicol; Turo Nurmikko; Jane Shipley; Rahul Singh; Andrea Trescot; Robert van Dongen; Lalit Venkatesan
Journal:  Pain       Date:  2021-07-01       Impact factor: 6.961

4.  Electrocatheter-mediated High-voltage Pulsed Radiofrequency of the Dorsal Root Ganglion in the Treatment of Chronic Lumbosacral Neuropathic Pain: A Randomized Controlled Study.

Authors:  Simone Vigneri; Gianfranco Sindaco; Marco La Grua; Matteo Zanella; Giuliano Lo Bianco; Valentina Paci; Francesca M Vinci; Chiara Sciacca; Laura Ravaioli; Gilberto Pari
Journal:  Clin J Pain       Date:  2020-01       Impact factor: 3.423

5.  Sample size and number of outcome measures of veterinary randomised controlled trials of pharmaceutical interventions funded by different sources, a cross-sectional study.

Authors:  K J Wareham; R M Hyde; D Grindlay; M L Brennan; R S Dean
Journal:  BMC Vet Res       Date:  2017-10-04       Impact factor: 2.741

6.  Sample size estimation practices in research protocols submitted to Danish scientific ethics committees.

Authors:  Marius Mølsted Flege; Simon Francis Thomsen
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials Commun       Date:  2018-08-15

7.  John D. Loeser Award Lecture: Size does matter, but it isn't everything: the challenge of modest treatment effects in chronic pain clinical trials.

Authors:  Shannon M Smith; Maurizio Fava; Mark P Jensen; Omar B Mbowe; Michael P McDermott; Dennis C Turk; Robert H Dworkin
Journal:  Pain       Date:  2020-09       Impact factor: 7.926

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.