Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23902644›Full record

ArticleBMC medical research methodology2013

Selecting a sample size for studies with repeated measures.

Yi Guo, Henrietta L Logan, Deborah H Glueck, Keith E Muller

Abstract readLetter
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 163 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
163citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

163 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Exercise intensity affects acute neurotrophic and neurophysiological responses poststroke.Journal of applied physiology (Bethesda, Md. : 1985) · 2019
    Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

103 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Yi Guo
Henrietta L Logan
Deborah H Glueck
Keith E Muller

Funding

Statistics and Data Coordinating CenterU54DE019261 · NIDCR · UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA · PI RILEY, JOSEPH L · 2008 to 2012
$5.4M
Multilevel and Longitudinal Study Sample Size Tools for Behavioral ScientistsR01DE020832 · NIDCR · UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA · PI MULLER, KEITH E · 2011 to 2014
$2.3M
NIDCR NIH HHS 1R01DE020832-01A1NIDCR NIH HHS R01 DE020832NIDCR NIH HHS U54-DE019261
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Many researchers favor repeated measures designs because they allow the detection of within-person change over time and typically have higher statistical power than cross-sectional designs. However, the plethora of inputs needed for repeated measures designs can make sample size selection, a critical step in designing a successful study, difficult. Using a dental pain study as a driving example, we provide guidance for selecting an appropriate sample size for testing a time by treatment interaction for studies with repeated measures. We describe how to (1) gather the required inputs for the sample size calculation, (2) choose appropriate software to perform the calculation, and (3) address practical considerations such as missing data, multiple aims, and continuous covariates.

Indexed as

Models, StatisticalSample SizeAnalysis of VarianceData Interpretation, StatisticalHumansPain MeasurementReproducibility of ResultsResearch DesignSoftware

Identifiers

PMID23902644
PMCPMC3734029

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.