Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
BMC Medical Research Methodology
Published in: BMC Medical Research Methodology 1/2017

Open Access 01-12-2017 | Research article

Sample size calculations based on a difference in medians for positively skewed outcomes in health care studies

Authors: Aidan G. O’Keeffe, Gareth Ambler, Julie A. Barber

Published in: BMC Medical Research Methodology | Issue 1/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

In healthcare research, outcomes with skewed probability distributions are common. Sample size calculations for such outcomes are typically based on estimates on a transformed scale (e.g. log) which may sometimes be difficult to obtain. In contrast, estimates of median and variance on the untransformed scale are generally easier to pre-specify. The aim of this paper is to describe how to calculate a sample size for a two group comparison of interest based on median and untransformed variance estimates for log-normal outcome data.

Methods

A log-normal distribution for outcome data is assumed and a sample size calculation approach for a two-sample t-test that compares log-transformed outcome data is demonstrated where the change of interest is specified as difference in median values on the untransformed scale. A simulation study is used to compare the method with a non-parametric alternative (Mann-Whitney U test) in a variety of scenarios and the method is applied to a real example in neurosurgery.

Results

The method attained a nominal power value in simulation studies and was favourable in comparison to a Mann-Whitney U test and a two-sample t-test of untransformed outcomes. In addition, the method can be adjusted and used in some situations where the outcome distribution is not strictly log-normal.

Conclusions

We recommend the use of this sample size calculation approach for outcome data that are expected to be positively skewed and where a two group comparison on a log-transformed scale is planned. An advantage of this method over usual calculations based on estimates on the log-transformed scale is that it allows clinical efficacy to be specified as a difference in medians and requires a variance estimate on the untransformed scale. Such estimates are often easier to obtain and more interpretable than those for log-transformed outcomes.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Freiman JA, Chalmers TC, Smith Jr. H, Kuebler RR. The importance of beta, the type II error and sample size in the design and interpretation of the randomized control trial: Survey of 71 negative trials. N Engl J Med. 1978; 299(13):690–4.CrossRefPubMed
2.
Schulz KF, Grimes DA. Sample size calculations in randomised trials: mandatory and mystical. Lancet. 2005; 365(9467):1348–53.CrossRefPubMed
3.
Chow SC, Wang H, Shao J. Sample size calculations in clinical research, 2nd ed. London: CRC Press; 2007.
4.
Fitzpatrick R, Fletcher A, Gore S, Spiegelhalter D, Cox D. Quality of life measure in health care. I: Applications and issues in assessment. BMJ. 1992; 305(6861):1074–7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
5.
Davnall F, Yip CSP, Ljungqvist G, Selmi M, Ng F, Sanghera B, et al. Assessment of tumor heterogeneity: an emerging imaging tool for clinical practice?Insights Imaging. 2012; 3(6):573–89.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
6.
Wolsztynski E, O’Sullivan F, O’Sullivan J, Eary JF. Statistical assessment of treatment response in a cancer patient based on pre-therapy and post-therapy FDG-PET scans. Stat Med. 2017; 36(7):1172–200.CrossRefPubMed
7.
8.
Stepaniak PS, Heij C, Mannaerts GH, de Quelerij M, de Vries G. Modeling procedure and surgical times for current procedural terminology-anesthesia-surgeon combinations and evaluation in terms of case-duration prediction and operating room efficiency: a multicenter study. Anesth Analg. 2009; 109(4):1232–45.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Randles RH, Wolfe DA. Introduction to the theory of nonparametric statistics. New York: Wiley; 1979.
10.
Vickers AJ. Parametric versus non-parametric statistics in the analysis of randomized trials with non-normally distributed data. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2005; 5(1):35.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
11.
Wolfe R, Carlin JB. Sample-Size Calculation for a Log-Transformed Outcome Measure. Control Clin Trials. 1999; 20(6):547–54.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Daly LE, Bourke GJ. Interpretation and Uses of Medical Statistics, 5th ed. Oxford: Blackwell Science; 2000.CrossRef
13.
Machin D, Campbell MJ, Tan SB, Tan SH. Sample Size Tables for Clinical Studies, 3rd ed. Chichester: Wiley–Blackwell; 2009.
14.
de Tisi J, Peacock JL, McEvoy AW, Harkness WFJ, Sander JW, Duncan JS. The long-term outcome of adult epilepsy surgery, patterns of seizure remission, and relapse: a cohort study. Lancet. 2011; 378:1388–95.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Enatsu R, Mikuni N. Invasive Evaluations for Epilepsy Surgery: A Review of the Literature. Neuro Med Chir (Tokyo). 2016; 56(5):221–7.CrossRef
16.
Dorfer C, Minchev G, Czech T, Stefanits H, Feucht M, Pataraia E, et al. A novel miniature robotic device for frameless implantation of depth electrodes in refractory epilepsy. J Neurosurg. 2017; 126:1622–8.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Nowell M, Rodionov R, Diehl B, Wehner T, Zombori G, Kinghorn J, et al. A Novel Method for Implementation of Frameless StereoEEG in Epilepsy Surgery. Neurosurgery. 2014; 10(4):525–34.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
18.
Frison L, Pocock SJ. Repeated measures in clinical trials: analysis using mean summary statistics and its implications for design. Stat Med. 1992; 11(13):1685–704.CrossRefPubMed
19.
Cundell B, Alexander NDE. Sample size calculations for skewed distributions. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2015; 15:28.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Sample size calculations based on a difference in medians for positively skewed outcomes in health care studies
Authors
Aidan G. O’Keeffe
Gareth Ambler
Julie A. Barber
Publication date
01-12-2017
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Medical Research Methodology / Issue 1/2017
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2288
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-017-0426-1

Other articles of this Issue 1/2017

BMC Medical Research Methodology 1/2017 Go to the issue

Research Article

Basic parametric analysis for a multi-state model in hospital epidemiology

Research Article

On comparison of net survival curves

Research article

Addressing data privacy in matched studies via virtual pooling

Research article

Utilising identifier error variation in linkage of large administrative data sources

Research article

Standardizing effect size from linear regression models with log-transformed variables for meta-analysis

Research article

A scoping review of comparisons between abstracts and full reports in primary biomedical research