Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38030925›Full record

ArticleBehavior research methods2024

Sample size planning for complex study designs: A tutorial for the mlpwr package.

Felix Zimmer, Mirka Henninger, Rudolf Debelak

Erratum issuedOpen access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Behavior research methods, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Felix ZimmerPsychological Methods, Evaluation and Statistics, Department of Psychology, University of Zurich, Binzmuehlestrasse 14, Box 27, 8050, Zurich, Switzerland. felix.zimmer@uzh.ch.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8127-0007
Mirka HenningerPsychological Methods, Evaluation and Statistics, Department of Psychology, University of Zurich, Binzmuehlestrasse 14, Box 27, 8050, Zurich, Switzerland.
Rudolf DebelakPsychological Methods, Evaluation and Statistics, Department of Psychology, University of Zurich, Binzmuehlestrasse 14, Box 27, 8050, Zurich, Switzerland.
University of Zurich · CH

Funding

Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung 188929
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A common challenge in designing empirical studies is determining an appropriate sample size. When more complex models are used, estimates of power can only be obtained using Monte Carlo simulations. In this tutorial, we introduce the R package mlpwr to perform simulation-based power analysis based on surrogate modeling. Surrogate modeling is a powerful tool in guiding the search for study design parameters that imply a desired power or meet a cost threshold (e.g., in terms of monetary cost). mlpwr can be used to search for the optimal allocation when there are multiple design parameters, e.g., when balancing the number of participants and the number of groups in multilevel modeling. At the same time, the approach can take into account the cost of each design parameter, and aims to find a cost-efficient design. We introduce the basic functionality of the package, which can be applied to a wide range of statistical models and study designs. Additionally, we provide two examples based on empirical studies for illustration: one for sample size planning when using an item response theory model, and one for assigning the number of participants and the number of countries for a study using multilevel modeling.

Indexed as

Models, StatisticalMonte Carlo MethodResearch DesignComputer SimulationHumansSample SizeSoftwareMachine learningPower analysisSample sizeSimulation

Identifiers

PMID38030925
PMCPMC11289223
OpenAlexW4389120358

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.