Cited by 198Probability and Statistical ResearchStatistical Methods in EpidemiologyStatistical Methods in Clinical Trials

How Appropriate are Popular Sample Size Formulas?

Kupper, Lawrence L., Hafner, Kerry B.·1989·The American Statistician

Abstract

One concern in the early stages of study planning and design is the minimum sample size needed to provide statistically credible results. This minimum sample size is usually determined via the use of simple formulas or, equivalently, from tables. The more popular formulas, however, involve large-sample approximations and hence may underestimate required sample sizes. This article provides empirical evidence indicating that this underestimation phenomenon is extreme for certain sample size formulas based on confidence interval width. Common sample size formulas that consider statistical power are also discussed; these are shown to perform quite well, even for small sample size situations. In this department The American Statistician publishes articles, reviews, and notes of interest to teachers of the first mathematical statistics course and of applied statistics courses. The department includes the Accent on Teaching Materials section; suitable contents for the section are described under the section heading. Articles and notes for the department, but not intended specifically for the section, should be useful to a substantial number of teachers of the indicated types of courses or should have the potential for fundamentally affecting the way in which a course is taught.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/00031305.1989.10475628

Cites

17 of 17 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 18 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kupper, L. L., & Hafner, K. B.
Affiliations
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
Venue
The American Statistician
Published
1989-05
Volume
43
Issue
2
Pages
101-105
ISSN
  • 0003-1305 (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-2731
OpenAlex
W2087486280
Cited by
196
References
18
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 8
FWCI
6.14
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
The American Statistician (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Probability and Statistical Research
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Epidemiology
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
Keywords
sample size determination, sample size formula, large sample approximation, confidence interval width, statistical power, research design, small 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