Literature DB >> 7599035

Sample size: how many patients are necessary?

P M Fayers, D Machin.   

Abstract

The need for sample size calculations is briefly reviewed: many of the arguments against small trials are already well known, and we only cursorily repeat them in passing. Problems that arise in the estimation of sample size are then discussed, with particular reference to survival studies. However, most of the issues which we discuss are equally applicable to other types of study. Finally, prognostic factor analysis designs are discussed, since this is another area in which experience shows that far too many studies are of an inadequate size and yield misleading results.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1995        PMID: 7599035      PMCID: PMC2034119          DOI: 10.1038/bjc.1995.268

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Cancer        ISSN: 0007-0920            Impact factor:   7.640


  27 in total

1.  A comment on replication, p-values and evidence.

Authors:  S N Goodman
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1992-05       Impact factor: 2.373

Review 2.  The combination of randomized and historical controls in clinical trials.

Authors:  S J Pocock
Journal:  J Chronic Dis       Date:  1976-03

3.  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.

Authors:  J A Freiman; T C Chalmers; H Smith; R R Kuebler
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1978-09-28       Impact factor: 91.245

4.  Statistical guidelines for contributors to medical journals.

Authors:  D G Altman; S M Gore; M J Gardner; S J Pocock
Journal:  Br Med J (Clin Res Ed)       Date:  1983-05-07

5.  Why do we need some large, simple randomized trials?

Authors:  S Yusuf; R Collins; R Peto
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1984 Oct-Dec       Impact factor: 2.373

6.  The evaluation of therapies: historical control studies.

Authors:  E A Gehan
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1984 Oct-Dec       Impact factor: 2.373

7.  Sensitivity and specificity of clinical trials. Randomized v historical controls.

Authors:  H S Sacks; T C Chalmers; H Smith
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  1983-04

8.  Statistics and ethics in medical research: III How large a sample?

Authors:  D G Altman
Journal:  Br Med J       Date:  1980-11-15

9.  Tables of the number of patients required in clinical trials using the logrank test.

Authors:  L S Freedman
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1982 Apr-Jun       Impact factor: 2.373

10.  Regression models for prognostic prediction: advantages, problems, and suggested solutions.

Authors:  F E Harrell; K L Lee; D B Matchar; T A Reichert
Journal:  Cancer Treat Rep       Date:  1985-10
View more
  14 in total

1.  Sample size matters: a guide for surgeons.

Authors:  Ulrich Guller; Daniel Oertli
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2005-05       Impact factor: 3.352

2.  Sample sizes for randomized trials measuring quality of life in cancer patients.

Authors:  S A Julious; S George; D Machin; R J Stephens
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  1997-03       Impact factor: 4.147

3.  The role of low-frequency rTMS in the superior parietal cortex during time estimation.

Authors:  Fernanda Manaia; Kaline Rocha; Victor Marinho; Francisco Magalhães; Thomaz Oliveira; Valécia Carvalho; Thalys Araújo; Carla Ayres; Daya Gupta; Bruna Velasques; Pedro Ribeiro; Mauricio Cagy; Victor Hugo Bastos; Silmar Teixeira
Journal:  Neurol Sci       Date:  2019-03-08       Impact factor: 3.307

4.  Low-frequency rTMS in the superior parietal cortex affects the working memory in horizontal axis during the spatial task performance.

Authors:  Jéssica Alves Ribeiro; Francisco Victor Costa Marinho; Kaline Rocha; Francisco Magalhães; Abrahão Fontes Baptista; Bruna Velasques; Pedro Ribeiro; Mauricio Cagy; Victor Hugo Bastos; Daya Gupta; Silmar Teixeira
Journal:  Neurol Sci       Date:  2018-01-12       Impact factor: 3.307

Review 5.  Estimating sample sizes for binary, ordered categorical, and continuous outcomes in two group comparisons.

Authors:  M J Campbell; S A Julious; D G Altman
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1995-10-28

6.  Methylphenidate decreases the EEG mu power in the right primary motor cortex in healthy adults during motor imagery and execution.

Authors:  Danielle Aprigio; Juliana Bittencourt; Mariana Gongora; Victor Marinho; Silmar Teixeira; Victor Hugo Bastos; Mauricio Cagy; Henning Budde; Pedro Ribeiro; Luis Fernando Basile; Bruna Velasques
Journal:  Brain Struct Funct       Date:  2021-02-17       Impact factor: 3.270

7.  Occult axillary lymph node metastases are of no prognostic significance in breast cancer.

Authors:  R R Millis; R Springall; A H S Lee; K Ryder; E R C Rytina; I S Fentiman
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2002-02-01       Impact factor: 7.640

8.  Sample size calculation for clinical trials: the impact of clinician beliefs.

Authors:  P M Fayers; A Cuschieri; J Fielding; J Craven; B Uscinska; L S Freedman
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2000-01       Impact factor: 7.640

9.  Sample sizes for cancer trials where Health Related Quality of Life is the primary outcome.

Authors:  S A Julious; M J Campbell; S J Walker; S L George; D Machin
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 7.640

10.  Day-to-day variations during clinical drug monitoring of morphine, morphine-3-glucuronide and morphine-6-glucuronide serum concentrations in cancer patients. A prospective observational study.

Authors:  Pål Klepstad; Priscilla Hilton; Jorunn Moen; Stein Kaasa; Petter C Borchgrevink; Kolbjørn Zahlsen; Ola Dale
Journal:  BMC Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2004-10-04
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.