Literature DB >> 355881

The importance of beta, the type II error and sample size in the design and interpretation of the randomized control trial. Survey of 71 "negative" trials.

J A Freiman, T C Chalmers, H Smith, R R Kuebler.   

Abstract

Seventy-one "negative" randomized control trials were re-examined to determine if the investigators had studied large enough samples to give a high probability (greater than 0.90) of detecting a 25 per cent and 50 per cent therapeutic improvement in the response. Sixty-seven of the trials had a greater than 10 per cent risk of missing a true 25 per cent therapeutic improvement, and with the same risk, 50 of the trials could have missed a 50 per cent improvement. Estimates of 90 per cent confidence intervals for the true improvement in each trial showed that in 57 of these "negative" trials, a potential 25 per cent improvement was possible, and 34 of the trials showed a potential 50 per cent improvement. Many of the therapies labeled as "no different from control" in trials using inadequate samples have not received a fair test. Concern for the probability of missing an important therapeutic improvement because of small sample sizes deserves more attention in the planning of clinical trials.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1978        PMID: 355881     DOI: 10.1056/NEJM197809282991304

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  N Engl J Med        ISSN: 0028-4793            Impact factor:   91.245


  232 in total

Review 1.  Sifting the evidence-what's wrong with significance tests?

Authors:  J A Sterne; G Davey Smith
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2001-01-27

2.  Design of treatment trials for functional gastrointestinal disorders.

Authors:  S J Veldhuyzen van Zanten; N J Talley; P Bytzer; K B Klein; P J Whorwell; A R Zinsmeister
Journal:  Gut       Date:  1999-09       Impact factor: 23.059

3.  [What is power and why specifically 80%?].

Authors:  H H Dubben; H P Beck-Bornholdt
Journal:  Med Klin (Munich)       Date:  1999-04-15

4.  Approaches to sample size calculation in comparative studies.

Authors:  R M Pandey
Journal:  Indian J Pediatr       Date:  1999 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 1.967

5.  Sample size estimation for the sorcerer's apprentice. Guide for the uninitiated and intimidated.

Authors:  J G Ray; M J Vermeulen
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  1999-07       Impact factor: 3.275

6.  How to assess new treatments.

Authors:  R Slinger; D Moher
Journal:  West J Med       Date:  2001-03

7.  Statistics in medicine: some considerations from a clinician's point of view.

Authors:  J Collazos
Journal:  Postgrad Med J       Date:  1998-10       Impact factor: 2.401

8.  [Methodological quality of controlled studies in the "Medizinische Klinik" journal. Analysis of contributions appearing between 1979 and 1996].

Authors:  L Mihan; J Windeler
Journal:  Med Klin (Munich)       Date:  1999-01-15

9.  Economic evaluation and clinical trials: size matters.

Authors:  A Briggs
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2000-12-02

10.  Forest plots: trying to see the wood and the trees.

Authors:  S Lewis; M Clarke
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2001-06-16
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.