The DOI matches its Crossref record; 38 of the 39 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Statistics in Brief: The Importance of Sample Size in the Planning and Interpretation of Medical Research
Open accessAbstract
The increasing volume of research by the medical community often leads to increasing numbers of contradictory findings and conclusions. Although the differences observed may represent true differences, the results also may differ because of sampling variability as all studies are performed on a limited number of specimens or patients. When planning a study reporting differences among groups of patients or describing some variable in a single group, sample size should be considered because it allows the researcher to control for the risk of reporting a false-negative finding (Type II error) or to estimate the precision his or her experiment will yield. Equally important, readers of medical journals should understand sample size because such understanding is essential to interpret the relevance of a finding with regard to their own patients. At the time of planning, the investigator must establish (1) a justifiable level of statistical significance, (2) the chances of detecting a difference of given magnitude between the groups compared, ie, the power, (3) this targeted difference (ie, effect size), and (4) the variability of the data (for quantitative data). We believe correct planning of experiments is an ethical issue of concern to the entire community.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“The sensitivity analysis indicated that bibliotherapy was not significantly more effective in trials with large samples; however, a possible explanation is that trials with smaller sample sizes might result in an exaggerated treatment effect.53”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences
Muller, K. E., & Cohen, J. (1989) · Technometrics · doi:10.2307/1270020 · Cited by 99,603
Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences
Cohen, J. (1990) · Computers Environment and Urban Systems · doi:10.1016/0198-9715(90)90050-4 · Cited by 65,417
Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.).
Lachenbruch, P. A., & Cohen, J. (1989) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.2307/2290095 · Cited by 37,421
Practical Statistics for Medical Research.
Walter, S., & Altman, D. G. (1992) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2532320 · Cited by 11,666
Practical Statistics for Medical Research
Altman, D. G. (1990) · doi:10.1201/9780429258589 · Cited by 10,668
Traumatic Arthritis of the Hip after Dislocation and Acetabular Fractures
Harris, W. H. (1969) · Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery · doi:10.2106/00004623-196951040-00012 · Cited by 6,145
Schulz (1995) · doi:10.1001/jama.1995.03520290060030 · Cited by 5,634
Banaszkiewicz, P. A. (2013) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-1-4471-5451-8_3 · Cited by 5,039
Jaeschke, R., Singer, J., & Guyatt, G. H. (1989) · Controlled Clinical Trials · doi:10.1016/0197-2456(89)90005-6 · Cited by 4,982
Practical Statistics for Medical Research.
Bartko, J. J., & Altman, D. G. (1992) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.2307/2290246 · Cited by 4,834
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Pearson ES, Neyman J. On the use, interpretation of certain test criteria for purposes of statistical inference: Part II. Biometrika. 1928;20A:263–294.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Serdar, C. C., Cihan, M., Yücel, D., & Serdar, M. A. (2020) · Biochemia Medica · doi:10.11613/bm.2021.010502 · Cited by 1,868
Cipriani, A., Zhou, X., Del Giovane, C., Hetrick, S. E., Qin, B., Whittington, C., Coghill, D., Zhang, Y., Hazell, P., Leucht, S., et al. (2016) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(16)30385-3 · Cited by 734
Zhou, X., Teng, T., Zhang, Y., Del Giovane, C., Furukawa, T. A., Weisz, J. R., Li, X., Cuijpers, P., Coghill, D., Xiang, Y., et al. (2020) · The Lancet Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/s2215-0366(20)30137-1 · Cited by 367
A primer on investigating the after effects of acute bouts of physical activity on cognition
Pontifex, M. B., McGowan, A. L., Chandler, M. C., Gwizdala, K. L., Parks, A. C., Fenn, K., & Kamijo, K. (2019) · Psychology of Sport and Exercise · doi:10.1016/j.psychsport.2018.08.015 · Cited by 339
Balki, I., Amirabadi, A., Levman, J., Martel, A. L., Emersic, Z., Meden, B., Garcia-Pedrero, A., Ramirez, S. C., Kong, D., Moody, A. R., et al. (2019) · Canadian Association of Radiologists Journal · doi:10.1016/j.carj.2019.06.002 · Cited by 299
Metadata
- Authors
- Biau, D. J., Kernéis, S., & Porcher, R.
- Affiliations
- Inserm (FR)
- Corresponding author
- Biau, David Jean
- Venue
- Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research
- Published
- 2008-06-20
- Volume
- 466
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 2282-2288
- ISSN
- 0009-921X (ISSN-L)
- 1528-1132
- PMC
- PMC2493004
- OpenAlex
- W2061128187
- Cited by
- 428
- References
- 39
- Citations by year
- 2026: 35 · 2025: 62 · 2024: 32 · 2023: 34 · 2022: 43 · 2021: 50 · 2020: 54 · 2019: 25 · 2018: 23 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 3
- FWCI
- 4.72
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Epidemiology
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Keywords
- sample size, statistical power, type II error, effect size, sampling variability, study design planning, statistical significance, research ethics
- MeSH terms
- Confidence Intervals, Odds Ratio, Sample Size, Biomedical Research
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
