The DOI matches its Crossref record; 47 of the 47 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Guidelines for Designing and Evaluating Feasibility Pilot Studies
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Pilot studies test the feasibility of methods and procedures to be used in larger-scale studies. Although numerous articles describe guidelines for the conduct of pilot studies, few have included specific feasibility indicators or strategies for evaluating multiple aspects of feasibility. In addition, using pilot studies to estimate effect sizes to plan sample sizes for subsequent randomized controlled trials has been challenged; however, there has been little consensus on alternative strategies. METHODS: In Section 1, specific indicators (recruitment, retention, intervention fidelity, acceptability, adherence, and engagement) are presented for feasibility assessment of data collection methods and intervention implementation. Section 1 also highlights the importance of examining feasibility when adapting an intervention tested in mainstream populations to a new more diverse group. In Section 2, statistical and design issues are presented, including sample sizes for pilot studies, estimates of minimally important differences, design effects, confidence intervals (CI) and nonparametric statistics. An in-depth treatment of the limits of effect size estimation as well as process variables is presented. Tables showing CI around parameters are provided. With small samples, effect size, completion and adherence rate estimates will have large CI. CONCLUSION: This commentary offers examples of indicators for evaluating feasibility, and of the limits of effect size estimation in pilot studies. As demonstrated, most pilot studies should not be used to estimate effect sizes, provide power calculations for statistical tests or perform exploratory analyses of efficacy. It is hoped that these guidelines will be useful to those planning pilot/feasibility studies before a larger-scale study.
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 source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“However, the sample size of the present study falls within the range recommended for pilot studies (Lancaster et al., 2004; Teresi et al., 2022).”
From Evaluation of effectiveness and acceptability of a psychological treatment for smoking cessation combined with a smartphone App: A pilot study (2024) · cites this paper as Teresi et al., 2022
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“The study aimed to recruit 80 participants to allow a 25% attrition rate and a final sample of 40 participants, appropriate for pilot feasibility studies (Creswell & Creswell, 2022; Teresi et al., 2022).”
From Acceptance and Commitment Therapy Tele-Counselling Program With Care Partners of Persons Living With Dementia: A Pilot Feasibility RCT. (2026) · cites this paper as Teresi et al., 2022
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
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
How we design feasibility studies
Bowen, D. J., Kreuter, M., Spring, B., Cofta-Woerpel, L., Linnan, L., Weiner, D., Bakken, S., Kaplan, C. P., Squiers, L., Fabrizio, C., et al. (2009) · American Journal of Preventive Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2009.02.002 · Cited by 4,021
Cella, D., Yount, S., Rothrock, N., Gershon, R., Cook, K., Reeve, B., Ader, D., Fries, J. F., Bruce, B., & Rose, M. (2007) · Medical Care · doi:10.1097/01.mlr.0000258615.42478.55 · Cited by 3,118
Sample size of 12 per group rule of thumb for a pilot study
Julious, S. A. (2005) · Pharmaceutical Statistics · doi:10.1002/pst.185 · Cited by 3,068
CONSORT 2010 statement: extension to randomised pilot and feasibility trials
on behalf of the PAFS consensus group, Eldridge, S. M., Chan, C. L., Campbell, M. J., Bond, C. M., Hopewell, S., Thabane, L., & Lancaster, G. A. (2016) · Pilot and Feasibility Studies · doi:10.1186/s40814-016-0105-8 · Cited by 2,843 · cited 1×
“Feasibility indicators can include completion rates and times for speci fi c components, perceived burden, incon-venience, and reasons for noncompletion, 9 all of which may inform assessment protocol modi fi cation.”
BackgroundBellg, A. J., Treatment Fidelity Workgroup of the NIH Behavior Change Consortium, Borrelli, B., Resnick, B., Hecht, J., Minicucci, D. S., Ory, M., Ogedegbe, G., Orwig, D., Ernst, D., et al. (2004) · Health Psychology · doi:10.1037/0278-6133.23.5.443 · Cited by 2,620
Design and analysis of pilot studies: recommendations for good practice
Lancaster, G. A., Dodd, S., & Williamson, P. R. (2004) · Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice · doi:10.1111/j..2002.384.doc.x · Cited by 2,572
Revicki, D. A., Hays, R. D., Cella, D. F., & Sloan, J. A. (2007) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2007.03.012 · Cited by 2,384
Whitehead, A. L., Julious, S. A., Cooper, C. L., & Campbell, M. J. (2016) · Statistical Methods in Medical Research · doi:10.1177/0962280215588241 · Cited by 1,936
The role and interpretation of pilot studies in clinical research
Leon, A. C., Davis, L. L., & Kraemer, H. C. (2011) · Journal of Psychiatric Research · doi:10.1016/j.jpsychires.2010.10.008 · Cited by 1,917
Eldridge, S. M., Lancaster, G. A., Campbell, M. J., Thabane, L., Hopewell, S., Coleman, C. L., & Bond, C. M. (2016) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0150205 · Cited by 1,581
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Jones, 2016, Differential item functioning in Patient-reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS®) physical functioning short forms, Psychol Test Assess Model, 58, 371
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 101–200 of 733
Brown, J. M., Rita, N., Franco‐Arellano, B., LeSage, A., & Arcand, J. (2025) · JMIR Formative Research · doi:10.2196/69242 · Cited by 5
“In conclusion, the majority of feasibility outcomes assessing study processes, resources, management, and intervention acceptability suggest that the study protocol was feasible [45].”
Conroy, A. A., Butterfield, R. M., Chibi, B., Hahn, J. A., Neilands, T. B., Msimango, L., van Heerden, A. C., Humphries, H., & Starks, T. J. (2025) · AIDS and Behavior · doi:10.1007/s10461-025-04804-w · Cited by 4
“Formal tests of health outcomes and attempts to obtain valid estimates of effect sizes are not statistically justified for pilot studies [88–93] due to smaller sample sizes and design adjustments necessary to maximize recruitment, retention, and other outcomes.”
A pilot comparison of the retention rates of FAST and BEFAST stroke warning-sign mnemonics
Guo, S., & Saver, J. L. (2025) · Frontiers in Neurology · doi:10.3389/fneur.2025.1624800 · Cited by 4
Heat stress risk assessment of farmers working in a hot environment: What about in Zambia?
Nyambe, A., Mwaanga, E. S., Mwiinde, A. M., & Michelo, C. (2025) · The Journal of Climate Change and Health · doi:10.1016/j.joclim.2025.100457 · Cited by 4
“A sample of 200 farmers (Monze: n = 100, Sioma: n = 100) was used to pilot the HSRW tool in Monze and Sioma, exceeding sample size guidelines recommended for comparable pilot studies assessing feasibility [20].”
Enhancing corporate sustainability through TQM and Technology Management in manufacturing
Restuputri, D. P., Febriana, D. S. T., & Masudin, I. (2025) · Production · doi:10.1590/0103-6513.20250006 · Cited by 4
Khoiriyah, K., & Werdiningsih, I. (2025) · Multidisciplinary Science Journal · doi:10.31893/multiscience.2026181 · Cited by 6
Malin, S. K., Shah, A. M., Berri, M. S., Zald, D. H., & Battillo, D. J. (2025) · Experimental Physiology · doi:10.1113/ep093333 · Cited by 4
Wexler, D. J., Mayberry, L. S., Nelson, L. A., Lema-Driscoll, J., Flores, L. C., Malloy, M. A., MacFadyen, J. G., Shen, J., Zaharris, E., Karanchi, H., et al. (2025) · American Heart Journal · doi:10.1016/j.ahj.2025.107332 · Cited by 4
Bradley, S. S., Chau, T. T., Kawamura, A. A., & Wright, F. V. (2026) · Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology · doi:10.1111/dmcn.70212 · Cited by 4
“To assess feasibility, 18 we used management indicators to assess safety and acceptability of the Trexo intervention to the child and physiotherapist plus PTA team, and scientific outcome indicators to evaluate associated changes in gross motor and goal measure areas.”
Haas, N. L., Korley, F. K., Schneider, R. M., Mamillapalli, S. L., Hepworth, E., Cranford, J. A., Lin, Y. K., & Griffey, R. T. (2026) · Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics · doi:10.1177/15209156261428034 · Cited by 4
Self‐Brown, S., Perry, E. W., Recinos, M., Cotner, M. A., Guastaferro, K., Owolabi, S., Spears, C. A., Whitaker, D. J., Huang, J., & Kegler, M. C. (2023) · Pilot and Feasibility Studies · doi:10.1186/s40814-023-01303-4 · Cited by 5
“We chose to end recruitment after 10 participants completed baseline measures based on practical considerations suggested in prior research, including budgetary constraints, the workflow for interventionists, and the number of participants needed to reasonably evaluate feasibility goals [70].”
BackgroundMethodChan, W., Wong, Y.-L., Tai, Y.-C., Liu, X., Yun, B., Zhang, Y., Hou, H. L.-Y., Kwong, D. L. �., Lee, V. H.-F., & Lam, W. (2024) · Cancers · doi:10.3390/cancers16234084 · Cited by 5
“However, the target sample size of 50 is based on recommendations from the literature and previous guidelines [24].”
Huang, A. J., Subak, L. L., Rowen, T. S., Schembri, M. E., Raghunathan, H., Gibson, C. J., Pawlowsky, S., Cheng, J., & Chao, M. T. (2024) · Journal of Integrative and Complementary Medicine · doi:10.1089/jicm.2024.0682 · Cited by 4
“40,41 The sample was designed to allow the study team to assemble three distinct and complete “ cohorts ” of 12 randomized participants, with half assigned to each intervention arm, consistent with a planned group intervention class size of six participants per yoga/exercise class.”
Daoust, R., Paquet, J., Williamson, D. R., Huard, V., Arbour, C., Perry, J. J., Émond, M., Berthelot, S., Archambault, P. M., Rouleau, D. M., et al. (2024) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0316450 · Cited by 4
Prochnow, T. M., Dunton, G. F., de la Haye, K., Porter, K. M. P., & Lee, C. (2025) · JMIR Research Protocols · doi:10.2196/68667 · Cited by 4
“For aim 1 (feasibility and acceptability), the planned sample size of 20 participants aligns with recommendations for feasibility studies [51].”
Fletcher, J. J., Edberg, A., Grifka, R. G., Westendorp, J., Elias, A. E., Knott, J., Martin, E., & Siddiqui, F. M. (2025) · Annals of Clinical and Translational Neurology · doi:10.1002/acn3.70024 · Cited by 4
Point-of-care glycemia testing in a safety-net dental care setting
Laniado, N., Shah, P. R., Cloidt, M., Robles, E., Badner, V., & Sydney, E. (2025) · The Journal of the American Dental Association · doi:10.1016/j.adaj.2025.01.006 · Cited by 5
Nijhuis, F. A. P., Schippers, B., Bloem, B. R., Post, B., & Meinders, M. J. (2025) · Journal of Neurology · doi:10.1007/s00415-025-12972-x · Cited by 4
“There is no consensus on a required sample size for pilot or feasibility studies, and numbers ranging from 10 to 100 participants per arm, with a median of 36 per arm for feasibility studies [43, 44], with a recommendation of 30 in total for qualitative feasibility studies.”
Korman, N., Stanton, R., Trott, M., Stubbs, B., Baker, A., Butler, C., Siskind, D. J., Rosenbaum, S., Firth, J., Martland, R., et al. (2025) · Australian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry · doi:10.1177/00048674251361681 · Cited by 4
Mira, J. J., Rios, J., Gil-Hernández, E., Abed, N., Neves, V. R., Pérez-Esteve, C., Guilabert, M., Rodríguez, A. A., & Ballester, P. (2025) · JMIR Serious Games · doi:10.2196/75104 · Cited by 4
“This sample size was determined pragmatically, reflecting the exploratory nature of the study, consistent with recommendations for pilot or feasibility studies where sample sizes are often based on practical considerations [29].”
Adegboye, O., Churchill, J. A., Moorjani, J., Johnson, H., Capper, S., Booker, J., Parnham, A. S., Lau, M., Sangar, V., & Finn, C. F. (2024) · Clinical Genitourinary Cancer · doi:10.1016/j.clgc.2024.102168 · Cited by 4
Sremanakova, J., Sowerbutts, A. M., Todd, C. J., Cooke, R. W. I., Pearce, L., Leiberman, D., McLaughlin, J. T., Hill, J., Ashby, H. L., Ramesh, A., et al. (2024) · European Journal of Clinical Nutrition · doi:10.1038/s41430-024-01491-z · Cited by 4
“As this is a feasibility study with a relatively small sample size we did not pre-specify sensitivity analyses for exploratory multiple regression analysis as this is not warranted [36 – 38].”
LEWIS, G. A., Irving, G. J., Wilding, J. P. H., & Hardy, K. J. (2024) · Diabetic Medicine · doi:10.1111/dme.15430 · Cited by 4
Bergerot, P. G., Bergerot, C. D., Silva, J. R. G., Fuzita, W. H., Franca, M. V. S., Lages, P. S., dos Anjos, G. M., de Azeredo, A. C., Patriota, C. B., Buso, M. M., et al. (2024) · Supportive Care in Cancer · doi:10.1007/s00520-024-09056-3 · Cited by 4
“The sample size for this study was determined based on established guidelines and practical considerations outlined by the National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (NCCIH), as well as the specific feasibility goals of the research [28].”
InfluentialFlorit‐Pons, J., Igualada, A., & Prieto, P. (2024) · Language Speech and Hearing Services in Schools · doi:10.1044/2024_lshss-24-00048 · Cited by 5
Plys, E., Seward, M., Allen, E. M., Tatar, R., Huberty, J., & Vranceanu, A. (2025) · The Gerontologist · doi:10.1093/geront/gnaf047 · Cited by 6
Teasdale, S. B., Ardill‐Young, O., Crawford, P., Gould, P., Hennessy, E., Inall, B., King, S., Lancaster, R., Millett, O., Pearson, A., et al. (2025) · Nutrition & Dietetics · doi:10.1111/1747-0080.70000 · Cited by 5
“…the tool was conducted by >50 clinicians in seven mental health regions across Australia, with the breakdown of professions broadly reflecting current screening practices in mental health services in Australia, 25 and with feedback gained through a questionnaire based on implementation frameworks.”
InfluentialDeliberate practice of medication administration among nursing students: a pilot study
Schroers, G., Pfieffer, J., Tell, D., Johnson, K. D., & O’Rourke, J. (2025) · International Journal of Nursing Education Scholarship · doi:10.1515/ijnes-2024-0056 · Cited by 4
Zemp, D. D., Pfister, P. B., Knols, R. H., Quadri, P., Bianchi, G., Giunzioni, D., Lavorato, S., Giannini, O., & de Bruin, E. D. (2022) · Frontiers in Digital Health · doi:10.3389/fdgth.2022.1054932 · Cited by 4
“Frontiers in Digital Health 04 test efficacy of the intervention but, in line with guidelines for feasibility trials (73, 74), confidence intervals are provided to reflect the uncertainty of the main feasibility outcome.”
Taylor, J. L. W., Clair, C. A., Gitlin, L. N., Atkins, S., Bandeen‐Roche, K., Saylor, M. A., Hladek, M. D., Riser, T. J., Thorpe, R. J., & Szanton, S. L. (2023) · Innovation in Aging · doi:10.1093/geroni/igad096 · Cited by 4
“The first step in adapting GBGB was to hold focus groups with older African American with pain and depression (33).”
BackgroundSvanholm, F., Turesson, C., Löfgren, M., & Björk, M. (2023) · JMIR Human Factors · doi:10.2196/46878 · Cited by 5
“We did not evaluate the methodological aspects of the forthcoming randomized controlled trial [43] such as the recruitment process, randomization, or outcome measures, which are other important aspects to investigate [29].”
BackgroundMethodLittle, M. A., Reid, T. A., MONCRIEF, M. A., Cohn, W. F., Wiseman, K. P., Wood, C. H., You, W., Anderson, R. T., & Krukowski, R. A. (2024) · Pilot and Feasibility Studies · doi:10.1186/s40814-024-01465-9 · Cited by 4
“At the 3-month follow-up, satisfaction with treatment components were assessed (e.g., “The program kept my interest and attention”; see Table 3) [47].”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialPeels, D. A., Boekhout, J. M., van Nassau, F., Lechner, L., Bolman, C. A. W., & Berendsen, B. (2024) · Implementation Science Communications · doi:10.1186/s43058-024-00622-8 · Cited by 4
“However, guidelines for designing and evaluating feasibility studies recommended sample sizes about 30 to establish feasibility [42, 43].”
BackgroundLi, X., Lampson, K., Ahles, T. A., Root, J. C., Li, Q. S., Li, Y., Ahsan, A., Mao, J. J. J., & Liou, K. T. (2025) · Current Oncology · doi:10.3390/curroncol32010027 · Cited by 3
“Informed Consent Statement: Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.”
Shi, Y., Guo, Y., Dai, J., Lu, J.-L., Huang, S., & Lu, X. (2025) · Revista da Escola de Enfermagem da USP · doi:10.1590/1980-220x-reeusp-2024-0181en · Cited by 3
“Previous studies have shown that a pilot experiment sample size of 30 cases is appropriate (22) .”
The Impact of Psychiatric Boarding in the Emergency Department: A Mixed-Methods Study
Hong, V., Harness, J. A., Cranford, J. A., Cervantes, V., Czyz, E. K., Bailey, J., Burke, N., Malas, N., & Rogers, A. (2025) · Hospital Pediatrics · doi:10.1542/hpeds.2024-008065 · Cited by 3
Cartwright, A. V., Krzyzanowski, H., Moss-Morris, R. E., Smith, L. J., Sawjani, Y., Kristensen, C. B., Mukaty, N., Norton, S., Armes, J., & Hirsch, C. R. (2025) · Psycho-Oncology · doi:10.1002/pon.70217 · Cited by 3
“A target sample of 70 randomised participants was set, based on the rule of thumb for feasibility trials to include at least 30 participants per arm and enable sample size calculation for a larger trial [29].”
Small numbers, big decisions: guidance for sample size in pilot trials
Lewis, M., Bromley, K., & Joseph, R. (2025) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.r1885 · Cited by 3
Phongtankuel, V., Czaja, S. J., Park, T., Moxley, J. H., Adelman, R. D., Dignam, R. R., Cruz-Oliver, D. M., Toliver, M. D., & Reid, M. C. (2025) · Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · doi:10.1111/jgs.70113 · Cited by 3
“We selected 80 as our sample size based on findings that 40 per group is suitable for establishing feasibility [33, 34].”
Harris, D. M., Thwaites, C. K., Callisaya, M. L., Mouer, R., Blazé, R., Clifford, A. M., & Morris, M. E. (2025) · Disability and Rehabilitation · doi:10.1080/09638288.2025.2595898 · Cited by 3
“Other aims were to test feasibility which included recruitment and retention rates, session attendance and program adherence, in-line with recommendations by Teresi et al. [21] and El-Kotob & Giangregorio [22].”
Zylla, D. M., Chrenka, E. A. B., Lin, K., Gilmore, G., Cowger, J., Rak, D. J., & Gupta, A. (2026) · JCO Oncology Practice · doi:10.1200/op-25-01165 · Cited by 3
Ali, S., Naz, N., Muhammad, D., Khanum, S., Naqvi, S. M. S. A., Amanullah, R., Farooq, M., Ajmal, H., & Arshad, S. (2026) · BMC Nursing · doi:10.1186/s12912-026-04541-y · Cited by 3
“This aligns with the recommendation that feasibility studies include 30–50 participants to provide meaningful estimates of key parameters and identify potential operational issues [43].”
Fairman, C. M., Owens, O. L., Kendall, K. L., Steele, J., Schumpp, A., Latella, C., Jones, M. T., Marcotte, L., Dawson, J. M., Peddle-McIntyre, C. M. J., et al. (2023) · Pilot and Feasibility Studies · doi:10.1186/s40814-023-01405-z · Cited by 3
“Taken collectively, understanding the feasibility of conducting a hybrid delivery resistance training intervention for individuals with lung cancer is a critical first step prior to progression to a larger clinical trial assessing effectiveness of the intervention [41, 42].”
BackgroundHotterbeex, P., Beeckman, M., Marent, P.-J., Latomme, J., Block, F. D., Baets, L. D., CHASTIN, S. F. M., Cardon, G., & van Uffelen, J. G. Z. (2024) · Journal of Aging Research · doi:10.1155/2024/2438067 · Cited by 4
“However, many diferent guidelines for sample sizes for pilot studies exist, indicating that sample sizes of 10 [64] to or 30 or more [65] are needed.”
BackgroundMethodSwanson, C. W., Vial, S. E., Manini, T. M., Sibille, K. T., & Clark, D. J. (2024) · Pilot and Feasibility Studies · doi:10.1186/s40814-024-01516-1 · Cited by 3
“For the purposes of this pilot study, the analysis will focus on assessing feasibility and acceptability through descriptive statistics [38, 62].”
MethodChopin, S. M., Zaur, A. J., Fountain, C., Nunez, A. C., & Sheerin, C. M. (2024) · Journal of Integrative and Complementary Medicine · doi:10.1089/jicm.2024.0512 · Cited by 3
“40 To determine feasibility, inclusion and enrollment rates were tracked; speci fi cally, we examined rates of quali fi cation (vs. disquali fi cation) using our speci fi ed criteria following assessment for eligibility.”
Ten simple rules for successfully carrying out funded research projects
Forero, D. A., Curioso, W. H., & Wang, W. (2024) · PLoS Computational Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1012431 · Cited by 5
“In many cases, an initial pilot phase [33] allows the identification of minor adjustments needed for data collection on a larger scale.”
BackgroundAldighrir, W. M. (2024) · European Journal of Education · doi:10.1111/ejed.12773 · Cited by 3
Effect of adapted dance program on gait in adults with cerebral palsy: a pilot study
Joung, H. J., Kim, T. H., & Park, M. S. (2024) · Frontiers in Neurology · doi:10.3389/fneur.2024.1443400 · Cited by 3
“We expect that this study will provide meaningful information for conducting large-scale studies for potential future use (12, 16).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialSchröter, M., Berschick, J., Koch, A. K., Schiele, J. K., Bogdanski, M., Steinmetz, M., Stritter, W., Keßler, C. S., & Seifert, G. (2024) · Pilot and Feasibility Studies · doi:10.1186/s40814-024-01553-w · Cited by 3
“A fixed number of N = 30 was chosen, based on practical considerations and recommendations for good practice in pilot studies [34].”
MethodNoguchi, K., Ochiai, R., Akase, T., Nishiyama, K., & Watabe, S. (2024) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0313817 · Cited by 3
Müller, P., Gali, H. K. R., Rajanayagam, S., Twieg, S., Jahn, P., & Hofstetter, S. (2025) · Applied Sciences · doi:10.3390/app15021002 · Cited by 3
Wang, X. J., Philpot, L. M., Ebbert, J. O., Dilmaghani, S., Loftus, C. G., Fox, J., & Palsson, O. S. (2025) · Clinical and Translational Gastroenterology · doi:10.14309/ctg.0000000000000811 · Cited by 3
Changes in community pharmacy communication – Towards emotional awareness at the pharmacy counter
Mottelson, N. B., Husted, G. R., Kaae, S. S., Rossing, C. V., & Fosgerau, C. F. (2025) · PEC Innovation · doi:10.1016/j.pecinn.2025.100380 · Cited by 3
“30 participants in the new mentalizing education were deemed reasonable within the given project frame to establish feasibility through a pre/post design combined with qualitative methods [29].”
Valdez, L. A., Markham, J., Scott, L., Person, S. D., Meyer, J. S., Robinson, D., & Buchanan, D. R. (2025) · Ethnicity and Health · doi:10.1080/13557858.2025.2526752 · Cited by 4
Furulund, E., Carlsen, S.-E. L., Alpers, S. E., Vold, J. H., Druckrey-Fiskaaen, K. T., Madebo, T., Dyrstad, S. M., Lid, T. G., & Fadnes, L. T. (2025) · Addiction Science & Clinical Practice · doi:10.1186/s13722-025-00583-w · Cited by 3
“Neverthe-less, this study provides important information relating to intervention experiences and feasibility of the intervention [48, 49].”
Wood, L., Morrison, A. P., Birken, M., Dare, C. R. J., Guerin, E., Nyikavaranda, P., Malde‐Shah, N., Persaud, K., Ford, P., Nebo, C., et al. (2025) · EClinicalMedicine · doi:10.1016/j.eclinm.2025.103380 · Cited by 3
“We aimed to recruit sixty participants in line with recommendations by CONSORT for feasibility and pilot RCTs. 27 This sample size allowed for dropouts, which are common in clinical trials in inpatient settings.”
Ranjit, S., Kissoon, N. “., Kumar, V., Vijayaraghavan, B. K. T., Natraj, R., Dalal, P., Venkatachalam, P., Lakshmanan, C., & Schlapbach, L. J. (2025) · Indian Journal of Critical Care Medicine · doi:10.5005/jp-journals-10071-25043 · Cited by 3
“13 The exploratory secondary clinical outcomes were the proportion of patients in each group meeting criteria for shock resolution at 6 and 12 hours of randomization, median time to shock resolution, survival free of vasoactive-inotrope support, and survival free of invasive ventilation from T 0,…”
Exploring dialogic analysis and thematic analysis of place conversations with older adults
Weil, J. (2022) · Working with Older People · doi:10.1108/wwop-07-2022-0026 · Cited by 3
Jacoby, N., Gullick, M. M., Sullivan, N. P., & Shalev, D. (2023) · Academic Psychiatry · doi:10.1007/s40596-023-01769-7 · Cited by 3
“Because this was a pilot feasibility study, our educational outcomes (interest, confidence, knowledge) were secondary and there were several limitations in measurement typical of pilot studies including the lack of psychometrically validated measurement tools, a priori clinically meaningful effect sizes, and sample si…”
BackgroundTwo stroke education programs designed for older adults
Sim, J., & Shin, C. (2023) · Geriatric Nursing · doi:10.1016/j.gerinurse.2023.10.014 · Cited by 5
Kormanis, A., Quinones, S., Obermiller, C., Denizard-Thompson, N., & Palakshappa, D. (2023) · JMIR Cardio · doi:10.2196/54530 · Cited by 3
“As there is no specific consensus on the sample size necessary to assess the feasibility of a pilot study, consistent with prior studies, we included 200 (~5% of the eligible population) patients [17,18].”
Bernard, S., Evans, H. J., Hoy, N. Y., Suderman, K., Cameron, B., Sexsmith, J., Kinnaird, A. S., Rourke, K. F., Dean, L., Pituskin, E., et al. (2024) · Contemporary Clinical Trials · doi:10.1016/j.cct.2024.107482 · Cited by 3
Vega, L. L., Pinero, D. P., Molina‐Martín, A., Hernández-Rodríguez, C. J., Cuadrado-Asensio, R., Martín-Gutiérrez, A., Arenillas, J. F., & Martín, M. B. C. (2024) · Seminars in Ophthalmology · doi:10.1080/08820538.2024.2324074 · Cited by 3
“The guidelines for designing and evaluating feasibility studies described by Teresi et al. 12 have been strictly followed, considering their recommendations of sample size, Specifically, for evaluating patient-reported outcomes, to reach saturation, sample sizes may be 30 or less.”
MethodHershberger, P. E., Gruss, V. A., Steffen, A. D., Adlam, K., Driessnack, M., Grotevant, H. D., Klock, S. C., Pasch, L. A., Bhagat, R., & Gallo, A. M. (2024) · Journal of Pediatric Health Care · doi:10.1016/j.pedhc.2024.06.006 · Cited by 3
“…was guided by the National Institutes of Health’s guidelines for pilot studies (National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health, 2017; Teresi et al., 2022) and the International Patient Decision Aids Standards recommendations for decision aid development (Coulter et al., 2013; Elwyn…”
Yiaslas, T. A., Rogers-Soeder, T. S., Ono, G., Kitazono, R. E., & Sood, A. (2024) · American Journal of Lifestyle Medicine · doi:10.1177/15598276241267932 · Cited by 3
Ahmed, K. Y., Fadnes, L. T., Kumar, B., Hasha, W., & Díaz, E. (2024) · Frontiers in Public Health · doi:10.3389/fpubh.2024.1347992 · Cited by 3
Schäfer, I., Jahns, V., Paucke, V., Lühmann, D., Scherer, M., & Nothacker, J. (2025) · Frontiers in Digital Health · doi:10.3389/fdgth.2025.1499333 · Cited by 3
Kostiuk, M. A., Moore, S. L., Kramer, E. S., Gilens, J. F., Sarwal, A., Saxon, D. R., Thomas, J. F., & Oser, T. K. (2025) · JMIR Research Protocols · doi:10.2196/62916 · Cited by 4
“…technical and operational feasibility and user acceptability, that is, 60% (18/30) of participants remain engaged with the technology solutions throughout the duration of the study, and 60% (18/30) of participants report positive experiences and satisfaction levels with the program overall [32].”
Abdallah, J. P., Morel, S. B. A., Soboleva, N., Quan, J., Price, C., & Goldfarb, M. (2025) · CJC Open · doi:10.1016/j.cjco.2025.03.007 · Cited by 3
“21 To determine the sample size needed for our study, we included at least 30 participants per group.”
Budge, S. L., Tebbe, E. A., Lee, J., Domínguez, S., Matsuno, E. G., & Lindley, L. M. (2025) · JMIR Formative Research · doi:10.2196/64477 · Cited by 3
“Teresi et al [17] defined feasibility around 4 key aspects.”
InfluentialDurepos, P., Ricketts, N., Olthuis, J. V., Gould, O. N., Boamah, S. A., McCloskey, R., Lanteigne, M., Giberson, E. R., Caverhill, K., Pickford, K., et al. (2026) · Journal of Applied Gerontology · doi:10.1177/07334648251338303 · Cited by 3
“The study aimed to recruit 80 participants to allow a 25% attrition rate and a fi nal sample of 40 participants, appropriate for pilot feasibility studies (Creswell & Creswell, 2022; Teresi et al., 2022).”
Tang, Y., Gierc, M., La, H., Liu, S., Lam, R. W., Puterman, E., & Faulkner, G. (2025) · PLOS One · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0321958 · Cited by 2
“Only five orientation sessions will be recorded and assessed by a research assistant using a fidelity checklist after each session, which will allow immediate modifications to improve treatment fidelity [37].”
Neadley, K. E., Downes, M., Chan, L., Poirier, B., Lynch, J., Boyd, M., & Shoubridge, C. (2025) · Pilot and Feasibility Studies · doi:10.1186/s40814-025-01702-9 · Cited by 2
“Following the most recent guidelines for evaluating intervention feasibility, practical considerations, such as participant flow, were used to generate sample size [30, 31].”
Oshman, L. D., Waselewski, M. E., Hisamatsu, R., Kim, N., Young, L., Hafez, D., & Chang, T. (2024) · JMIR Research Protocols · doi:10.2196/54043 · Cited by 2
“Our sample size was determined based on participant flow, budgetary constraints, and published guidelines for designing feasibility pilot studies [35].”
MethodSingh, K., Nikhare, K., Gandral, M., Aithal, K. R., Patil, S. G., Girish, M. P., Gupta, M., Madan, K., Sawhney, J., Ali, K., et al. (2024) · American Heart Journal · doi:10.1016/j.ahj.2024.07.008 · Cited by 1
Implementation of a Fracture Liaison Service in a tertiary hospital in Malaysia: a feasibility study
Cheah, M. H., Lai, P. S. M., & Ong, T. I. W. (2024) · Archives of Osteoporosis · doi:10.1007/s11657-024-01427-x · Cited by 2
“As our goal was to investigate the feasibility process outcomes including the recruitment rates and adherence rates, a sample size of at least 70 was needed to achieve an acceptable confidence interval [17].”
Carter, E. J., Zavez, K., Schramm, C. A., Zolla, M. M., Baron, K., & Banach, D. B. (2024) · Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology · doi:10.1017/ice.2024.119 · Cited by 2
Lovette, B. C., Lyons, K. D., Greenberg, J., & Lopez, R. P. (2024) · Disability and Rehabilitation · doi:10.1080/09638288.2024.2423783 · Cited by 2
“…and development [34]. the primary purpose of this mixed-methods, single-arm, repeated measures study was to evaluate key indicators of feasibility [35] including (1) enrollment/retention; (2) adherence: attendance and home program; (3), fidelity, (4) ability to complete measures; and (5) safety…”
Kuruppu, N. R., Chaboyer, W. P., Tobiano, G., Abayadeera, A., & Ranse, K. (2024) · Intensive and Critical Care Nursing · doi:10.1016/j.iccn.2024.103891 · Cited by 2
Rösch, S. A., Wünsche, L., Thiele, C., Reinstaller, T., Zaehle, T., Schag, K., Giel, K. E., Plewnia, C., Steiner, J. H., & Junne, F. (2024) · Journal of Eating Disorders · doi:10.1186/s40337-024-01160-3 · Cited by 2
Eiger, B., Rathleff, M. S., Ickmans, K., Rheel, E., & Straszek, C. L. (2025) · Journal of Clinical Medicine · doi:10.3390/jcm14030771 · Cited by 2
Medford, E., Lane, S., Sharp, A., & Care, A. (2025) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0316297 · Cited by 2
“Our feasibility outcomes of interest relate to whether the study procedure is acceptable, participant adherence and retention to the study is achieved, data collection is feasible, and that cervical stiffness assessment fidelity is maintained with adequate reliability and safety[34].”
Bodilsen, S. S., Aadahl, M., Thomsen, T. H., & Wienecke, T. (2025) · Physiotherapy Research International · doi:10.1002/pri.70048 · Cited by 2
Corke, L., Langelier, D. M., Gupta, A. A., Capozza, S. J., Антонен, Е. Г., Trépanier, G., Avery, L. M., Lopez, C. J., Edwards, B. Q., & Jones, J. M. (2025) · Cancers · doi:10.3390/cancers17071066 · Cited by 3
“Given the primary aim of this pilot study was to assess feasibility, acceptability, and safety, the sample size was not calculated using power analysis [31,54,55].”
Feasibility of a Fruit and Vegetable Home Food Environment Accessibility Intervention
Alvarado, A. V., Vega‐López, S., Ruggiero, L., Earthman, C. P., & Robson, S. M. (2025) · Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.jneb.2025.03.013 · Cited by 2
Marcotte‐Chénard, A., Oliveira, B., Tortoriello, J. P., Crampton, K., Bouck, T., Madden, K. M., Singer, J., Falkenhain, K., & Little, J. P. (2025) · Journal of the American Nutrition Association · doi:10.1080/27697061.2025.2518116 · Cited by 2
Skovbjerg, S., Kolls, M., Kjærbye‐Thygesen, A., & Fjorback, L. O. (2025) · Pilot and Feasibility Studies · doi:10.1186/s40814-025-01670-0 · Cited by 2
“The estimated sample size for trial was thus 30 per trial arm with a total of 60 participants [34, 53].”
Price, J., Westlake, B., & Brunet, J. (2025) · Current Oncology · doi:10.3390/curroncol32070368 · Cited by 2
“A conventional power calculation was not appropriate given the feasibility aims of this study [42] and the novel nature of delivering the program at the ORCF [38].”
Rosa, D., Villa, G., Marcomini, I., Nardin, E., Gianfranceschi, E., Faini, A., Pengo, M. F., Bilo, G., Croce, A., Parati, G., et al. (2025) · High Blood Pressure & Cardiovascular Prevention · doi:10.1007/s40292-025-00731-y · Cited by 3
“As recommended by the literature [22], pilot studies are interventions to ensure sustained patient engagement with health monitoring via wearable devices.”
Muller, K., Ridley, E. J., Tatucu-Babet, O. A., Kimmel, L. A., Groombridge, C. J., Fitzgerald, M., Elliott, A., & Lambell, K. (2025) · Injury · doi:10.1016/j.injury.2025.112606 · Cited by 2
Welsby, E., Moore, E., Hobbs, D., Hordacre, B. G., Ward, E., & Hillier, S. (2025) · Physical & Occupational Therapy In Pediatrics · doi:10.1080/01942638.2025.2536141 · Cited by 2
“A sample size calculation was not conducted for this pilot feasibility study, however, the literature suggests a sample of thirty participants may be appropriate to establish feasibility (Teresi et al., 2022).”
Elsaid, S., Wang, R., Kloiber, S. M., Desmond, K. L., & Foll, B. L. (2025) · International Journal of Molecular Sciences · doi:10.3390/ijms26146915 · Cited by 2
“The adjustments for multiple comparisons were not performed because of the exploratory nature of our pilot study [105,106].”
Emergency Department Care Coordination Program for Assisted Living Residents With Dementia
Wittenberg, G. F., Serina, P. T., Stetten, N. E., Reddy, A., & McCreedy, E. M. (2025) · JAMA Network Open · doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2025.26413 · Cited by 2
Malika, N. M., Bogart, L. M., Adamu, N., Maganga, G., Jeon, E. D., Fenta, E. H., Diouf, K., & Ojikutu, B. O. (2025) · Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health · doi:10.1007/s10903-025-01762-2 · Cited by 3
Ramos, K., Ayaz, A., Riley, J. A., Faircloth, K., Porter, L. S., & Strauman, T. J. (2025) · Cancers · doi:10.3390/cancers17172809 · Cited by 2
Perchoux, C., Topalian, N., Klein, S., Chaix, B., Tharrey, M., Röcke, C., Gerber, P., Klein, O., Missling, A., Omrani, H., et al. (2025) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2025-105499 · Cited by 3
“However, pilot studies should not be used to inform power calculation due to their limited samples, 88 but should be used to evaluate the feasibility, which was confirmed here.”
Fadlilah, S., Murdhiono, W. R., Lesmana, M. H. S., Susanto, H., Thato, R., Rias, Y. A., & Tsai, H. (2025) · Journal of Nursing Research · doi:10.1097/jnr.0000000000000704 · Cited by 2
“Beyond reducing costs and increasing ef fi ciency, pilot studies involving non-DM subjects provide advantages such as improved generalizability, creating normative data sets, and providing essential data for identifying response range types (Teresi et al., 2022).”
Brundle, C., Johansson, J. F., Best, K., Clegg, A. P., Förster, A., Atkinson, T., Foster, M., Humphrey, S., Iliff, A., Inglis, J., et al. (2025) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2025-102723 · Cited by 2
Berk, J., Fu, E. S., Murphy, M., Akiyama, M. J., Sulkowski, M., Rich, J. D., & Frank, H. E. (2025) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2025-104839 · Cited by 2
Metadata
- Authors
- Teresi, J. A., Yu, X., Stewart, A. L., & Hays, R. D.
- Affiliations
- Hebrew Home (US)
- The University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston (US)
- University of California, San Francisco (US)
- University of California, Los Angeles (US)
- Corresponding author
- Teresi, Jeanne A.
- ORCID
- Hays, Ron D.
- Venue
- Medical Care
- Published
- 2021-11-23
- Volume
- 60
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 95-103
- ISSN
- 0025-7079 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC8849521
- OpenAlex
- W3215891836
- Cited by
- 734
- References
- 46
- Citations by year
- 2026: 280 · 2025: 279 · 2024: 141 · 2023: 26 · 2022: 7
- FWCI
- 32.16
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Medical Care (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institutes of Health (2p30ag028741-16)
- University of California, San Francisco
- National Institute on Aging (P30‐AG028741, P30AG059303, P30AG059301, P30AG021684, P30AG015272, P30AG022845)
- National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases
- Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (K12HD052023)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
- Keywords
- effect size estimation, sample size determination, randomized controlled trials, recruitment and retention, intervention fidelity, treatment acceptability, adherence, participant engagement, intervention adaptation, minimally important difference, confidence intervals, nonparametric statistics, design effect
- MeSH terms
- Feasibility Studies, Humans, Pilot Projects, Research Design, Guidelines as Topic
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