Successfully reported this slideshow.
Upcoming SlideShare
×

# Power Analysis and Sample Size Determination

16,332 views

Published on

• Full Name
Comment goes here.

Are you sure you want to Yes No
• I've donated the material to my wife's company - PRAISIA TECHNOLOGIES (www.praisia.com). You can contact them at contact@praisia.com and get this presentation.

Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
• please sir. send this presenattion to me on Liaqat23m@yahoo.com

Are you sure you want to  Yes  No

### Power Analysis and Sample Size Determination

1. 1. Power Analysis and Sample Size Determination AK Dhamija
2. 2. Researchers differ A researcher conducted a study comparing the effect of an intervention vs placebo on reducing body weight, and found 5 kg reduction among the intervention group with P=0.01. Another researcher conducted a similar study comparing the effect of the same intervention vs the same placebo on reducing body weight, and found the same 5 kg reduction with the intervention group but could not claim that the intervention was effective because P=0.35.
3. 3. Agenda Power Sample Size Calculations Examples Changes in the basic formulae Flaws in Statements
4. 4. Power is Effected by….. Variation in the outcome (σ2) ↓ σ2 → power ↑ Significance level (α) ↑α → power ↑ Difference (effect) to be detected (δ) ↑δ → power ↑ One-tailed vs. two-tailed tests Power is greater in one-tailed tests than in comparable two-tailed tests
5. 5. Power Changes 2n = 32, 2 sample test, 81% power, δ=2, σ = 2, α = 0.05, 2-sided test Variance/Standard deviation σ: 2 → 1 Power: 81% → 99.99% σ: 2 → 3 Power: 81% → 47% Significance level (α) α : 0.05 → 0.01 Power: 81% → 69% α : 0.05 → 0.10 Power: 81% → 94%
6. 6. Power Changes 2n = 32, 2 sample test, 81% power, δ=2, σ = 2, α = 0.05, 2-sided test Difference to be detected (δ) δ : 2 → 1 Power: 81% → 29% δ : 2 → 3 Power: 81% → 99% Sample size (n) n: 32 → 64 Power: 81% → 98% n: 32 → 28 Power: 81% → 75% One-tailed vs. two-tailed tests Power: 81% → 88%
7. 7. Power Formula Depends on study design Not hard, but can be VERY algebra intensive May want to use a computer program or statistician
8. 8. How Big a Sample We Need? Fundamental research question Should be addressed after determining the primary objective and study design Too Few Patients in a clinical study – May fail to detect a clinically important difference Too Many – Involve extra patients – Therapy may have risks – Cost more
9. 9. How Big a Sample We Need? Fundamentalresearch question How Big? 18 180 1,800 18,000 180,000
10. 10. Sample Size Formula Information Variables of interest type of data e.g. continuous, categorical Desired power Desired significance level Effect/difference of clinical importance Standard deviations of continuous outcome variables One or two-sided tests
11. 11. Sample Size & Study Design Randomized controlled trial (RCT) Block/stratified-block randomized trial Equivalence trial Non-randomized intervention study Observational study Prevalence study Measuring sensitivity and specificity
12. 12. Sample Size & Data Structure Paired data Repeated measures Groups of equal sizes Hierarchical data
13. 13. Sample Size Non-randomized studies looking for differences or associations require larger sample to allow adjustment for confounding factors Absolute sample size is of interest surveys sometimes take % of population approach Study’s primary outcome is the variable you do the sample size calculation for If secondary outcome variables considered important make sure sample size is sufficient Increase the ‘real’ sample size to reflect loss to follow up, expected response rate, lack of compliance, etc. Make the link between the calculation and increase
14. 14. Steps Step 1. Define Primary Objective To see if feeding milk to 5 year old kids enhances growth. Step 2. Study Design Extra Milk Diet 5 yr olds Normal Milk Diet Outcome: height (cm) Step 3. Define clinically significant difference one wishes to detect Difference (∆) of 0.5 cm
15. 15. Steps Step 4. Define degree of certainty of finding this difference beta (β) or type II error : The probability of NOT detecting a significant difference when there really is one. Risk of a false-negative finding ie Risk of declaring no significant difference in height between the milk diets when a difference really does exist. Set at ≤ 20% Power of the Test: Probability of detecting a predefined clinically significant difference. Power = (1- β) = 1 -20% = 80%
16. 16. Steps Step 5. Define significance level Alpha (α) or type I error: The probability of detecting a significant difference when the treatments are really equally effective Risk of a false-positive finding Set at 5% : One has a 5% chance or 1 in 20 odds of declaring a significant difference between the milk diets when in fact they are really equal. We are willing to accept that 1 time out of 20 we will produce a false positive finding
17. 17. For the Milk Study Type I error (α) = 0.05 Type II error (β) = 0.20 Power = (1- β) = 0.80 Clinically significant diff (∆) = 0.5cm Measure of variation (SD) = 2.0 cm – Exists in literature or “Guesstimate” Formula Beta N = 2(SD)2 x f(α, β) f(α Alpha 0.05 0.10 0.20 0.50 ∆2 0.10 10.8 8.6 6.2 2.7 = 2(2)2 x 7.9 / 0.52 0.05 13.0 10.5 7.9 3.8 = 252.8 (each group) 0.02 15.8 13.0 10.0 5.4 0.01 17.8 14.9 11.7 6.6
18. 18. Simple Method Nomogram Standardized difference = smallest medically relevant diff estimated standard deviation = 0.5/2.0 = 0.25 Assumptions: 1. 2 sample comparison only 2. Same number of subjects per group 3. Variable is a continuous measure that is normally distributed 500
19. 19. 1 sample test Study Objective : Study effect of new sleep aid Baseline to sleep time after taking the medication for one week Two-sided test, α = 0.05, power = 1-β = 90% Difference(δ) = 1 (4 hours of sleep to 5) Standard deviation(σ) = 2 hr 2 2 2 2 ( Z1 /2 Z1 ) (1.960 1.282) 2 n 2 42.04 43 12 Change δ from 1hr to 2 hr makes n goes from 43 to 11 2 2 (1.960 1.282) 2 n 2 10.51 11 2
20. 20. 1 sample test Change power from 90% to 80% makes n goes from 11 to 8 (Small sample: start thinking about using the t distribution) (1.960 0.841) 2 22 n 7.85 8 22 Change the standard deviation from 2 to 3 makes n goes from 8 to 18 2 2 (1.960 0.841) 3 n 2 17.65 18 2
21. 21. Sleep Aid Example: 2 Sample Original design (2-sided test, α = 0.05, 1-β = 90%, σ = 2hr, δ = 1 hr) Two sample randomized parallel design Needed 43 in the one-sample design In 2-sample need twice that, in each group! 4 times as many people are needed in this design 2( Z1 /2 Z1 ) 2 2 2(1.960 1.282)2 22 n 2 84.1 85 170 total! 12 Change δ from 1hr to 2 hr makes n goes from 72 to 44 2(1.960 1.282) 2 22 n 21.02 22 44 total 22
22. 22. Sleep Aid Example: 2 Sample Change power from 90% to 80% makes n goes from 44 to 32 2(1.960 0.841)2 22 n 15.69 16 32 total 22 Change the standard deviation from 2 to 3 makes n goes from 32 to 72 2(1.960 0.841)2 32 n 35.31 36 72 total 22
23. 23. Summary Changes in the detectable difference have HUGE impacts on sample size 20 point difference → 25 patients/group 10 point difference → 100 patients/group 5 point difference → 400 patients/group Changes in α, β, σ, number of samples, if it is a 1- or 2-sided test can all have a large impact on your sample size calculation
24. 24. Matched Pair Designs Similar to 1-sample formula Means (paired t-test) Mean difference from paired data Variance of differences Proportions Based on discordant pairs
25. 25. Difference in Proportion Study Objective To increase survival by 5% with a new cancer drug P1 = % survival (std) = 85% P2 = % survival (new) = 90% Power = 90% N = P1 (100 - P1) + P2 (100 - P2) x f (α, β) = 913.5 (each group) (P2 - P1)2 = 1827 Total A very large study has the power to demonstrate statistical significance for very small, even clinically inconsequential differences.
26. 26. Changes in basic formulae Unequal #s in Each Group Ratio of cases to controls Use if want λ patients randomized to the treatment arm for every patient randomized to the placebo arm Take no more than 4-5 controls/case n2 n1 controls for every case 2 2 2 ( Z1 /2 Z1 ) ( 1 2 / ) n1 2
27. 27. # of Covariates & # of Subjects At least 10 subjects for every variable investigated In logistic regression No general justification This is stability, not power Peduzzi et al., (1985) biased regression coefficients and variance estimates Principle component analysis (PCA) (Thorndike 1978 p 184): N≥10m+50 or even N ≥ m2 + 50
28. 28. Balanced Designs: Easier Equal numbers in two groups is the easiest to handle If you have more than two groups, still, equal sample sizes easiest Complicated design = simulations Done by the statistician
29. 29. Multiple Comparisons If you have 4 groups All 2 way comparisons of means 6 different tests Bonferroni: divide α by # of tests 0.025/6 ≈ 0.0042 High-throughput laboratory tests
30. 30. Flaws in Statements "A previous study in this area recruited 150 subjects and found highly significant results (p=0.014), and therefore a similar sample size should be sufficient here." Previous studies may have been 'lucky' to find significant results, due to random sampling variation. "Sample sizes are not provided because there is no prior information on which to base them." Find previously published information Conduct small pre-study If a very preliminary pilot study, sample size calculations not usually necessary No prior information on standard deviations Give the size of difference that may be detected in terms of number of standard deviations
31. 31. Roadmap 1. Do a sample size calculation before you start collecting data 2. Collect data 3. Perform statistical test : IF p value < 0.05, declare statistical significance 4. Consider clinical significance by looking at the size of the difference
32. 32. References “Sample Size Estimation”, Phil Hahn Queen’s University ”Sample Size and Power”, Laura Lee Johnson, Ph.D., Statistician, National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine ”Sample Size Estimation and Power Analysis”, Ayumi Shintani, PhD, MPH Department of Biostatistics, Vanderbilt University