Cited by 14Statistical Methods in Clinical TrialsStroke Rehabilitation and RecoveryStatistical Methods in Epidemiology

Using the Barthel Index and modified Rankin Scale as Outcome Measures for Stroke Rehabilitation Trials; A Comparison of Minimum Sample Size Requirements

Open access
McGill, Kris, Sackley, Catherine, Godwin, Jon, Gavaghan, David, Ali, Myzoon, Ballester, Belen Rubio, Brady, Marian C, Brady, M.C +34 more·2022·Journal of Stroke and Cerebrovascular Diseases

Abstract

Objectives Underpowered trials risk inaccurate results. Recruitment to stroke rehabilitation randomised controlled trials (RCTs) is often a challenge. Statistical simulations offer an important opportunity to explore the adequacy of sample sizes in the context of specific outcome measures. We aimed to examine and compare the adequacy of stroke rehabilitation RCT sample sizes using the Barthel Index (BI) or modified Rankin Scale (mRS) as primary outcomes. Methods We conducted computer simulations using typical experimental event rates (EER) and control event rates (CER) based on individual participant data (IPD) from stroke rehabilitation RCTs. Event rates are the proportion of participants who experienced clinically relevant improvements in the RCT experimental and control groups. We examined minimum sample size requirements and estimated the number of participants required to achieve a number needed to treat within clinically acceptable boundaries for the BI and mRS. Results We secured 2350 IPD (18 RCTs). For a 90% chance of statistical accuracy on the BI a rehabilitation RCT would require 273 participants per randomised group. Accurate interpretation of effect sizes would require 1000s of participants per group. Simulations for the mRS were not possible as a clinically relevant improvement was not detected when using this outcome measure. Conclusions Stroke rehabilitation RCTs with large sample sizes are required for accurate interpretation of effect sizes based on the BI. The mRS lacked sensitivity to detect change and thus may be unsuitable as a primary outcome in stroke rehabilitation trials.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2021.106229

Cites

40 of 40 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • BI may be a useful outcome in stroke rehabilitation RCTs with sufficient sample sizes, whereas the mRS seems to lack sensitivity to detect change and may be unsuitable as a primary outcome.

    “BI may be a useful outcome in stroke rehabilitation RCTs with sufficient sample sizes to support accurate interpretation of statistical significance levels; however, the mRS seems to lack sensitivity to detect change and thus may be unsuitable as a primary outcome [67].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
McGill, K., Sackley, C., Godwin, J., Gavaghan, D., Ali, M., Ballester, B. R., Brady, M. C., Brady, M. C., Ali, M., Ashburn, A., Barer, D., Barzel, A., Bernhardt, J., Bowen, A., Drummond, A., Edmans, J., English, C., Gladman, J., Godecke, E., Hiekkala, S., Hoffman, T., Kalra, L., Kuys, S., Langhorne, P., Laska, A. C., Lees, K., Logan, P., Machner, B., Mead, G., Morris, J., Pandyan, A., Pollock, A., Pomeroy, V, Rodgers, H., Sackley, C., Shaw, L., Stott, D. J., Sunnerhagen, K. S., Tyson, S., van Vliet, P., Walker, M., & Whiteley, W.
Affiliations
  • Glasgow Caledonian University (GB)
  • University of Oxford (GB)
  • University of Nottingham (GB)
  • Institute for Bioengineering of Catalonia (ES)
Corresponding author
McGill, Kris
Venue
Journal of Stroke and Cerebrovascular Diseases
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2022-02
Volume
31
Issue
2
Pages
106229
ISSN
1052-3057 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3212706943
Cited by
14
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 1
FWCI
1.49
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Stroke and Cerebrovascular Diseases (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Bournemouth University Research Online (Bournemouth University) (acceptedVersion)
  • ResearchOnline (Glasgow Caledonian University) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Discovery Research Portal (University of Dundee) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
  • Glasgow Caledonian University
  • Scottish Government Health and Social Care Directorate
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rehabilitation › Stroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Epidemiology
Keywords
stroke rehabilitation, Barthel Index, modified Rankin Scale, sample size determination, outcome measure sensitivity, statistical power, number needed to treat, individual patient data, randomized controlled trials, functional outcome measures
MeSH terms
Stroke Rehabilitation, Humans, Research Design, Severity of Illness Index, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Outcome Assessment, Health Care, Sample Size

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