|
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
|
Determination and Selection of the Optimum Number of Sites and Patients for Clinical Studies
P.P. Hujoel
Department of Dental Public Health Sciences, SM-35, School of Dentistry, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 98195, Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 98195
T.A. DeRouen
Department of Dental Public Health Sciences, SM-35, School of Dentistry, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 98195, Department of Biostatistics, School of Public Health, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 98195
Calculating required sample sizes is a critical step in the design of any study. For dental studies, the sample size needs to be specified at two levels: (1) the number of patients (n) enrolled in the study, and (2) the average number of sites (m) examined per patient. In general, m and n should be selected in such a way that the precision of the research findings is maximized, while the cost of the study is minimized. This objective can be realized by taking stock of the components of variation and the costs involved with enrolling patients and examining sites. The research cost for n patients ($C1/ patient), at an average of m sites per patient ($C2/site), can usually be approximated by n C1 + nm C2. The precision varies as a function of the variance components, m, and n. To optimize precision for a fixed cost, the average number of sites examined per patient (mopt) should be approximately equal towhere p is the within-patient correlation coefficient of the site-specific variable measured. When mopt is approximately equal to or in excess of the average number of sites availableper patient, whole-mouth examinations are indicated. When mopt is considerably smaller than the average number of sites available, the sample of optimum size should be obtained by some random mechanism. Examination of a number of sites considerably different from mopt results in a waste of resources, regardless of the number of patients studied. Standard statistical analyses for determination of the patient sample size required to obtain a pre-specified precision or power are discussed.
REFERENCES
- Burt BA ( 1988). The status of epidemiological data on periodontal diseases. In: Guggenheim B, editor. Periodontology today. Basel (Switzerland): Karger, 68-76.
- Conference Summary Report (1991). A research agenda for primary care: summary report of a conference. Washington (DC): US Department of Health and Human Services. Report No. AHCPR 91-08, 6-7.
- Cochran WG (1967). Sampling techniques. 2nd ed. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
- DeRouen TA, Mancl L., Hujoel PP (1991). Measurement of associations
- in periodontal diseases using statistical methods for dependent data. J Periodont Res 26:218-229.
- Donner A., Birkett N., Buck C. ( 1981). Randomization by cluster. Sample size requirements and analysis. Am J Epidemiol 114:906-914.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Donner A., Banting D. (1988). Adjustment of frequently used chi-square procedures for the effect of site-to-site dependencies in the analysis of dental data. J Dent Res 68:1350-1354.
- Fleiss JL, Park MH, Chilton NW, Alman JE, Feldman RS, Chauncey HH (1987). Representativeness of the "Ramfjord teeth" for epidemiologic studies of gingivitis and periodontitis. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 15:221-224.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- Hansen MH, Hurwitz WN, Madow WG (1953). Simple cluster sampling. In: Sample survey methods and theory. Vol. I. Methods and applications. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 238-313.
- Hujoel PP, Moulton LH, Loesche WJ (1990). Estimation of sensitivity and specificity of site-specific diagnostic tests. J Periodont Res 25:193-196.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- Hunt RJ, Fann SJ ( 1991). Effect of examining half of the teeth in partial periodontal recordings of older adults. J Dent Res 70:1380-1385.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Kish L. ( 1965). Fundamentals of survey sampling. In: Survey sampling. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
- Kronmal RA (1985). Commentary on the published results of the lipid research clinics coronary primary prevention trial. J Am MedAssoc 253:2091.
- Page RC, DeRouen TA (1992). Issues specific to studies of periodontitis. J Periodont Res (in press).
- Raj D. (1968). Sample survey background. In: Sampling theory. Chap. II. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 26. Ramfjord SP (1959). Indices for prevalence and incidence of periodontal disease. J Periodontol 30:51-59.
- SAS Institute Inc. (1985). SAS procedures guide for personal computers. Version 6 ed. Cary (NC): SAS Institute Inc. Snedecor GW (1956). Analysis of variance: single classification. In: Statistical methods. 5th ed. Iowa: The Iowa State College Press, 271-275.
- Sukhatme PV, Sukhatme BV, Sukhatme S., Asok A. ( 1984). Subsampling. In: Sampling theory of surveys with applications. 3rd ed. Chapter VIII. India: Bangalore Press, 339-342.
Journal of Dental Research, Vol. 71, No. 8,
1516-1521 (1992)
DOI: 10.1177/00220345920710081001

CiteULike Complore Connotea Del.icio.us Digg Reddit Technorati Twitter What's this?
|
|