The quest for "power": contradictory hypotheses and inflated sample sizes.

To have the "power" of avoiding undersized clinical trials, the customary statistical strategy used in the past few decades is aimed at rejecting both a null stochastic hypothesis and a contradictory alternative hypothesis. This approach gives a trial the "power" to confirm the "insignificance" of differences much smaller than the large value of delta desired in trials done to show efficacy. In many instances, however, a prime problem is that the current "double-significance" approach produces sample sizes 2-3 times larger than needed for stochastic confirmation of large differences (> or =delta). The inflated sample sizes and consequent problems can be avoided if a realistic value for delta is chosen and maintained thereafter, and if an adequate "capacity" is calculated for "single significance."