ReviewNutrients2025
Powering Nutrition Research: Practical Strategies for Sample Size in Multiple Regression.
Review in Nutrients, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Association Between Socioeconomic Factors and the Clinical Course of Nonoperatively Treated Pediatric Scaphoid Fractures.Journal of the Pediatric Orthopaedic Society of North America · 2026Article
- Patient-Centered Diabetes Care Through an Ethical Lens: Associations with Patient Satisfaction and Patient-Reported Outcomes in Saudi Primary Healthcare.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Menopausal duration and relative skeletal muscle index predict metabolic inflexibility during walking in postmenopausal women with overweight/obesity.American journal of physiology. Regulatory, integrative and comparative physiology · 2026Article
- Article
- Exploring Subpopulations for Epidemiological Precision Nutrition Research: The Example ofNutrients · 2026Article
- Association of Subacromial Bursa Characteristics With Preoperative Nocturnal Pain and the Efficacy of Surgical Treatment for Pain Relief: A Prospective Cohort Study.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2026Article
- Exploring demographic and organisational variations in patient safety culture: a cross-sectional, multicentre study in operating theatres of six Norwegian hospitals.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Impact of Occupational Noise Exposure on Physical and Mental Health of Water Pumping Station Operators in Lebanon.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Robust statistical analysis is essential for advancing evidence-based nutrition research, particularly when investigating the complex relationships between dietary exposure and health outcomes. Multiple regression is a widely used analytical technique in nutrition studies due to its ability to control for confounding variables and assess multiple predictors simultaneously. However, the reliability, validity, and generalizability of findings from regression analyses depend heavily on having an appropriate sample size. Despite its importance, many published nutrition studies do not include formal sample size justifications or power calculations, leading to a high risk of Type II errors and reduced interpretability of results. This methodological review examines three commonly used approaches to sample size determination in multiple regression analysis: the rule of thumb, variance explained (R
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.