Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Medical Research Methodology 1/2013

Open Access 01-12-2013 | Research article

An audit of sample sizes for pilot and feasibility trials being undertaken in the United Kingdom registered in the United Kingdom Clinical Research Network database

Authors: Sophie AM Billingham, Amy L Whitehead, Steven A Julious

Published in: BMC Medical Research Methodology | Issue 1/2013

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

There is little published guidance as to the sample size required for a pilot or feasibility trial despite the fact that a sample size justification is a key element in the design of a trial. A sample size justification should give the minimum number of participants needed in order to meet the objectives of the trial. This paper seeks to describe the target sample sizes set for pilot and feasibility randomised controlled trials, currently running within the United Kingdom.

Methods

Data were gathered from the United Kingdom Clinical Research Network (UKCRN) database using the search terms ‘pilot’ and ‘feasibility’. From this search 513 studies were assessed for eligibility of which 79 met the inclusion criteria. Where the data summary on the UKCRN Database was incomplete, data were also gathered from: the International Standardised Randomised Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN) register; the clinicaltrials.gov website and the website of the funders. For 62 of the trials, it was necessary to contact members of the research team by email to ensure completeness.

Results

Of the 79 trials analysed, 50 (63.3%) were labelled as pilot trials, 25 (31.6%) feasibility and 14 were described as both pilot and feasibility trials. The majority had two arms (n = 68, 86.1%) and the two most common endpoints were continuous (n = 45, 57.0%) and dichotomous (n = 31, 39.2%). Pilot trials were found to have a smaller sample size per arm (median = 30, range = 8 to 114 participants) than feasibility trials (median = 36, range = 10 to 300 participants). By type of endpoint, across feasibility and pilot trials, the median sample size per arm was 36 (range = 10 to 300 participants) for trials with a dichotomous endpoint and 30 (range = 8 to 114 participants) for trials with a continuous endpoint. Publicly funded pilot trials appear to be larger than industry funded pilot trials: median sample sizes of 33 (range = 15 to 114 participants) and 25 (range = 8 to 100 participants) respectively.

Conclusion

All studies should have a sample size justification. Not all studies however need to have a sample size calculation. For pilot and feasibility trials, while a sample size justification is important, a formal sample size calculation may not be appropriate. The results in this paper describe the observed sample sizes in feasibility and pilot randomised controlled trials on the UKCRN Database.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
3.
go back to reference Stallard N: Optimal sample sizes for phase II clinical trials and pilot studies. Stat Med. 2012, 31: 1031-1042. 10.1002/sim.4357.CrossRefPubMed Stallard N: Optimal sample sizes for phase II clinical trials and pilot studies. Stat Med. 2012, 31: 1031-1042. 10.1002/sim.4357.CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Prescott PA, Soeken KL: The potential uses of pilot work. Nurs Res. 1989, 38: 60-62. 10.1097/00006199-198901000-00015.CrossRefPubMed Prescott PA, Soeken KL: The potential uses of pilot work. Nurs Res. 1989, 38: 60-62. 10.1097/00006199-198901000-00015.CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Hertzog MA: Considerations in determining sample size for pilot studies. Res Nurs Health. 2008, 31: 180-191. 10.1002/nur.20247.CrossRefPubMed Hertzog MA: Considerations in determining sample size for pilot studies. Res Nurs Health. 2008, 31: 180-191. 10.1002/nur.20247.CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Julious SA, Patterson SD: Sample sizes for estimation in clinical research. Pharm Stat. 2004, 3: 213-215. 10.1002/pst.125.CrossRef Julious SA, Patterson SD: Sample sizes for estimation in clinical research. Pharm Stat. 2004, 3: 213-215. 10.1002/pst.125.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Browne RH: On the use of a pilot sample for sample size determination. Stat Med. 1995, 14: 1933-1940. 10.1002/sim.4780141709.CrossRefPubMed Browne RH: On the use of a pilot sample for sample size determination. Stat Med. 1995, 14: 1933-1940. 10.1002/sim.4780141709.CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Julious SA: Sample size of 12 per group rule of thumb for a pilot study. Pharm Stat. 2005, 4: 287-291. 10.1002/pst.185.CrossRef Julious SA: Sample size of 12 per group rule of thumb for a pilot study. Pharm Stat. 2005, 4: 287-291. 10.1002/pst.185.CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Sim J, Lewis M: The size of a pilot study for a clinical trial should be calculated in relation to considerations of precision and efficiency. J Clin Epidemiol. 2012, 65: 301-308. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2011.07.011.CrossRefPubMed Sim J, Lewis M: The size of a pilot study for a clinical trial should be calculated in relation to considerations of precision and efficiency. J Clin Epidemiol. 2012, 65: 301-308. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2011.07.011.CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Lancaster GA, Dodd S, Williamson PR: Design and analysis of pilot studies: recommendations for good practice. J Eval Clin Pract. 2002, 10 (2): 307-312.CrossRef Lancaster GA, Dodd S, Williamson PR: Design and analysis of pilot studies: recommendations for good practice. J Eval Clin Pract. 2002, 10 (2): 307-312.CrossRef
15.
go back to reference SPSS Inc: Released 2009. PASW statistics for windows, version 18.0. 2009, Chicago: SPSS Inc SPSS Inc: Released 2009. PASW statistics for windows, version 18.0. 2009, Chicago: SPSS Inc
16.
go back to reference Moore CG, Carter RE, Nietert PJ, Stewart PW: Recommendations for planning pilot studies in clinical and translational research. Clin Transl Sci. 2011, 4 (5): 332-337. 10.1111/j.1752-8062.2011.00347.x.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Moore CG, Carter RE, Nietert PJ, Stewart PW: Recommendations for planning pilot studies in clinical and translational research. Clin Transl Sci. 2011, 4 (5): 332-337. 10.1111/j.1752-8062.2011.00347.x.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
17.
go back to reference Bourgeois FT, Murthy S, Mandl KD: Outcome reporting among drug trials registered in ClinicalTrials.gov. Ann Intern Med. 2010, 153: 158-166. 10.7326/0003-4819-153-3-201008030-00006.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Bourgeois FT, Murthy S, Mandl KD: Outcome reporting among drug trials registered in ClinicalTrials.gov. Ann Intern Med. 2010, 153: 158-166. 10.7326/0003-4819-153-3-201008030-00006.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
18.
go back to reference Campbell MJ, Julious SA, Altman DG: Sample sizes for dichotomous, ordered categorical and continuous outcomes in two group comparisons. Br Med J. 1995, 311: 1145-1148. 10.1136/bmj.311.7013.1145. With Erratrum 1996, 312, 96CrossRef Campbell MJ, Julious SA, Altman DG: Sample sizes for dichotomous, ordered categorical and continuous outcomes in two group comparisons. Br Med J. 1995, 311: 1145-1148. 10.1136/bmj.311.7013.1145. With Erratrum 1996, 312, 96CrossRef
Metadata
Title
An audit of sample sizes for pilot and feasibility trials being undertaken in the United Kingdom registered in the United Kingdom Clinical Research Network database
Authors
Sophie AM Billingham
Amy L Whitehead
Steven A Julious
Publication date
01-12-2013
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Medical Research Methodology / Issue 1/2013
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2288
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-13-104

Other articles of this Issue 1/2013

BMC Medical Research Methodology 1/2013 Go to the issue