Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Trials 1/2014

Open Access 01-12-2014 | Research

Sample size requirements to estimate key design parameters from external pilot randomised controlled trials: a simulation study

Authors: M Dawn Teare, Munyaradzi Dimairo, Neil Shephard, Alex Hayman, Amy Whitehead, Stephen J Walters

Published in: Trials | Issue 1/2014

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

External pilot or feasibility studies can be used to estimate key unknown parameters to inform the design of the definitive randomised controlled trial (RCT). However, there is little consensus on how large pilot studies need to be, and some suggest inflating estimates to adjust for the lack of precision when planning the definitive RCT.

Methods

We use a simulation approach to illustrate the sampling distribution of the standard deviation for continuous outcomes and the event rate for binary outcomes. We present the impact of increasing the pilot sample size on the precision and bias of these estimates, and predicted power under three realistic scenarios. We also illustrate the consequences of using a confidence interval argument to inflate estimates so the required power is achieved with a pre-specified level of confidence. We limit our attention to external pilot and feasibility studies prior to a two-parallel-balanced-group superiority RCT.

Results

For normally distributed outcomes, the relative gain in precision of the pooled standard deviation (SD p ) is less than 10% (for each five subjects added per group) once the total sample size is 70. For true proportions between 0.1 and 0.5, we find the gain in precision for each five subjects added to the pilot sample is less than 5% once the sample size is 60. Adjusting the required sample sizes for the imprecision in the pilot study estimates can result in excessively large definitive RCTs and also requires a pilot sample size of 60 to 90 for the true effect sizes considered here.

Conclusions

We recommend that an external pilot study has at least 70 measured subjects (35 per group) when estimating the SD p for a continuous outcome. If the event rate in an intervention group needs to be estimated by the pilot then a total of 60 to 100 subjects is required. Hence if the primary outcome is binary a total of at least 120 subjects (60 in each group) may be required in the pilot trial. It is very much more efficient to use a larger pilot study, than to guard against the lack of precision by using inflated estimates.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
2.
go back to reference Vickers AJ: Underpowering in randomized trials reporting a sample size calculation. J Clin Epidemiol. 2003, 56 (8): 717-720. 10.1016/S0895-4356(03)00141-0.CrossRefPubMed Vickers AJ: Underpowering in randomized trials reporting a sample size calculation. J Clin Epidemiol. 2003, 56 (8): 717-720. 10.1016/S0895-4356(03)00141-0.CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Charles P, Giraudeau B, Dechartres A, Baron G, Ravaud P: Reporting of sample size calculation in randomised controlled trials: review. BMJ. 2009, 338: b1732-10.1136/bmj.b1732.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Charles P, Giraudeau B, Dechartres A, Baron G, Ravaud P: Reporting of sample size calculation in randomised controlled trials: review. BMJ. 2009, 338: b1732-10.1136/bmj.b1732.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
4.
go back to reference Clark T, Berger U, Mansmann U: Sample size determinations in original research protocols for randomised clinical trials submitted to UK research ethics committees: review. BMJ. 2013, 346: f1135-10.1136/bmj.f1135.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Clark T, Berger U, Mansmann U: Sample size determinations in original research protocols for randomised clinical trials submitted to UK research ethics committees: review. BMJ. 2013, 346: f1135-10.1136/bmj.f1135.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
5.
go back to reference McDonald AM, Knight RC, Campbell MK, Entwistle VA, Grant AM, Cook JA, Elbourne DR, Francis D, Garcia J, Roberts I: What influences recruitment to randomised controlled trials? A review of trials funded by two UK funding agencies. Trials. 2006, 7 (1): 9-10.1186/1745-6215-7-9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral McDonald AM, Knight RC, Campbell MK, Entwistle VA, Grant AM, Cook JA, Elbourne DR, Francis D, Garcia J, Roberts I: What influences recruitment to randomised controlled trials? A review of trials funded by two UK funding agencies. Trials. 2006, 7 (1): 9-10.1186/1745-6215-7-9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
6.
go back to reference Sully BG, Julious SA, Nicholl J: A reinvestigation of recruitment to randomised, controlled, multicenter trials: a review of trials funded by two UK funding agencies. Trials. 2013, 14 (1): 166-10.1186/1745-6215-14-166.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Sully BG, Julious SA, Nicholl J: A reinvestigation of recruitment to randomised, controlled, multicenter trials: a review of trials funded by two UK funding agencies. Trials. 2013, 14 (1): 166-10.1186/1745-6215-14-166.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
8.
go back to reference Arnold DM, Burns KEA, Adhikari NKJ, Kho ME, Meade MO, Cook DJ: The design and interpretation of pilot trials in clinical research in critical care. Crit Care Med. 2009, 37 (1): S69-S74.CrossRefPubMed Arnold DM, Burns KEA, Adhikari NKJ, Kho ME, Meade MO, Cook DJ: The design and interpretation of pilot trials in clinical research in critical care. Crit Care Med. 2009, 37 (1): S69-S74.CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Thabane L, Ma J, Chu R, Cheng J, Ismaila A, Rios L, Robson R, Thabane M, Giangregorio L, Goldsmith C: A tutorial on pilot studies: the what, why and how. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2010, 10 (1): 1-10.1186/1471-2288-10-1.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Thabane L, Ma J, Chu R, Cheng J, Ismaila A, Rios L, Robson R, Thabane M, Giangregorio L, Goldsmith C: A tutorial on pilot studies: the what, why and how. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2010, 10 (1): 1-10.1186/1471-2288-10-1.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
10.
go back to reference Lee EC, Whitehead AL, Jacques RM, Julious SA: The statistical interpretation of pilot trials: should significance thresholds be reconsidered?. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2014, 14: 41-10.1186/1471-2288-14-41.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Lee EC, Whitehead AL, Jacques RM, Julious SA: The statistical interpretation of pilot trials: should significance thresholds be reconsidered?. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2014, 14: 41-10.1186/1471-2288-14-41.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
11.
go back to reference Proschan MA: Two-stage sample size re-estimation based on a nuisance parameter: a review. J Biopharm Stat. 2005, 15 (4): 559-574. 10.1081/BIP-200062852.CrossRefPubMed Proschan MA: Two-stage sample size re-estimation based on a nuisance parameter: a review. J Biopharm Stat. 2005, 15 (4): 559-574. 10.1081/BIP-200062852.CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Birkett MA, Day SJ: Internal pilot studies for estimating sample size. Stat Med. 1994, 13 (23–24): 2455-2463.CrossRefPubMed Birkett MA, Day SJ: Internal pilot studies for estimating sample size. Stat Med. 1994, 13 (23–24): 2455-2463.CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Wittes J, Brittain E: The role of internal pilot-studies in increasing the efficiency of clinical-trials. Stat Med. 1990, 9 (1–2): 65-72.CrossRefPubMed Wittes J, Brittain E: The role of internal pilot-studies in increasing the efficiency of clinical-trials. Stat Med. 1990, 9 (1–2): 65-72.CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Friede T, Kieser M: Blinded sample size re-estimation in superiority and noninferiority trials: bias versus variance in variance estimation. Pharm Stat. 2013, 12 (3): 141-146. 10.1002/pst.1564.CrossRefPubMed Friede T, Kieser M: Blinded sample size re-estimation in superiority and noninferiority trials: bias versus variance in variance estimation. Pharm Stat. 2013, 12 (3): 141-146. 10.1002/pst.1564.CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Browne RH: On the use of a pilot sample for sample-size determination. Stat Med. 1995, 14 (17): 1933-1940. 10.1002/sim.4780141709.CrossRefPubMed Browne RH: On the use of a pilot sample for sample-size determination. Stat Med. 1995, 14 (17): 1933-1940. 10.1002/sim.4780141709.CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Julious SA: Sample size of 12 per group rule of thumb for a pilot study. Pharm Stat. 2005, 4 (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 (4): 287-291. 10.1002/pst.185.CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Julious SA: Designing clinical trials with uncertain estimates of variability. Pharm Stat. 2004, 3 (4): 261-268. 10.1002/pst.139.CrossRef Julious SA: Designing clinical trials with uncertain estimates of variability. Pharm Stat. 2004, 3 (4): 261-268. 10.1002/pst.139.CrossRef
18.
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 (3): 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 (3): 301-308. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2011.07.011.CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Kieser M, Wassmer G: On the use of the upper confidence limit for the variance from a pilot sample for sample size determination. Biom J. 1996, 38 (8): 941-949. 10.1002/bimj.4710380806.CrossRef Kieser M, Wassmer G: On the use of the upper confidence limit for the variance from a pilot sample for sample size determination. Biom J. 1996, 38 (8): 941-949. 10.1002/bimj.4710380806.CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Bland JM: The tyranny of power: is there a better way to calculate sample size?. BMJ. 2009, 339: b3985-10.1136/bmj.b3985.CrossRefPubMed Bland JM: The tyranny of power: is there a better way to calculate sample size?. BMJ. 2009, 339: b3985-10.1136/bmj.b3985.CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Sahu SK, Smith TMF: A Bayesian method of sample size determination with practical applications. J R Stat Soc Ser A – Stat Soc. 2006, 169: 235-253. 10.1111/j.1467-985X.2006.00408.x.CrossRef Sahu SK, Smith TMF: A Bayesian method of sample size determination with practical applications. J R Stat Soc Ser A – Stat Soc. 2006, 169: 235-253. 10.1111/j.1467-985X.2006.00408.x.CrossRef
22.
go back to reference O’Hagan A, Stevens JW, Campbell MJ: Assurance in clinical trial design. Pharm Stat. 2005, 4 (3): 187-201. 10.1002/pst.175.CrossRef O’Hagan A, Stevens JW, Campbell MJ: Assurance in clinical trial design. Pharm Stat. 2005, 4 (3): 187-201. 10.1002/pst.175.CrossRef
23.
go back to reference Brutti P, De Santis F: Robust Bayesian sample size determination for avoiding the range of equivalence in clinical trials. J Stat Plann Inference. 2008, 138 (6): 1577-1591. 10.1016/j.jspi.2007.05.041.CrossRef Brutti P, De Santis F: Robust Bayesian sample size determination for avoiding the range of equivalence in clinical trials. J Stat Plann Inference. 2008, 138 (6): 1577-1591. 10.1016/j.jspi.2007.05.041.CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Kirkwood BR, Sterne JAC: Essential Medical Statistics. 2003, Oxford: Blackwell Science, 2 Kirkwood BR, Sterne JAC: Essential Medical Statistics. 2003, Oxford: Blackwell Science, 2
25.
go back to reference Campbell MJ, Walters SJ, Machin D: Medical Statistics: A Textbook for the Health Sciences. 2007, Chichester: Wiley, 4 Campbell MJ, Walters SJ, Machin D: Medical Statistics: A Textbook for the Health Sciences. 2007, Chichester: Wiley, 4
26.
go back to reference Satterthwaite FE: An approximate distribution of estimates of variance components. Biometrics Bull. 1946, 2: 110-114. 10.2307/3002019.CrossRef Satterthwaite FE: An approximate distribution of estimates of variance components. Biometrics Bull. 1946, 2: 110-114. 10.2307/3002019.CrossRef
27.
go back to reference Welch BL: The generalization of ‘Student’s’ problem when several different population variances are involved. Biometrika. 1947, 34: 28-35.PubMed Welch BL: The generalization of ‘Student’s’ problem when several different population variances are involved. Biometrika. 1947, 34: 28-35.PubMed
28.
go back to reference StataCorp: Statistical Software: Release 12. 2011, TX: College Station StataCorp: Statistical Software: Release 12. 2011, TX: College Station
29.
go back to reference Team RC: R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. 2013, Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing Team RC: R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. 2013, Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing
30.
go back to reference Cohen J: Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioural Sciences. 1988, Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 2 Cohen J: Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioural Sciences. 1988, Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 2
31.
go back to reference Agresti A, Coull BA: Approximate is better than ‘exact’ for interval estimation of binomial proportions. Am Statistician. 1998, 52 (2): 119-126. Agresti A, Coull BA: Approximate is better than ‘exact’ for interval estimation of binomial proportions. Am Statistician. 1998, 52 (2): 119-126.
32.
go back to reference Burton A, Altman DG, Royston P, Holder RL: The design of simulation studies in medical statistics. Stat Med. 2006, 30 (25): 4279-4292.CrossRef Burton A, Altman DG, Royston P, Holder RL: The design of simulation studies in medical statistics. Stat Med. 2006, 30 (25): 4279-4292.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Sample size requirements to estimate key design parameters from external pilot randomised controlled trials: a simulation study
Authors
M Dawn Teare
Munyaradzi Dimairo
Neil Shephard
Alex Hayman
Amy Whitehead
Stephen J Walters
Publication date
01-12-2014
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Trials / Issue 1/2014
Electronic ISSN: 1745-6215
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/1745-6215-15-264

Other articles of this Issue 1/2014

Trials 1/2014 Go to the issue