Connect
MJA
MJA

In reply: Determining the sample size in a clinical trial

Adrienne Kirby, Val Gebski and Anthony C Keech
Med J Aust 2003; 178 (7): . || doi: 10.5694/j.1326-5377.2003.tb05241.x
Published online: 7 April 2003

In reply: A key message of our article is that the minimum possible difference that would render the intervention clinically worthwhile needs to be determined in the design phase of the study.1 This potential clinical difference (net advantage over standard care) must, of necessity, incorporate the potential trade-offs between any outcome advantages and associated toxicities and/or cost disadvantages.




Correspondence: 

  • 1. Kirby A, Gebski V, Keech AC. Determining the sample size in a clinical trial. Med J Aust 2002; 177: 256-257. <eMJA full text>
  • 2. Shakespeare TP, Gebski VJ, Veness MJ, Simes J. Improving the interpretation of clinical studies using confidence levels, clinical significance curves and riskbenefit contours. Lancet 2001; 357: 1349-1353.
  • 3. Frieman JA, Chalmers TC, Smith H Jr, Kuebler RR. The importance of beta, the type II error and sample size in the design and interpretation of the randomised control trial: survey of 71 "negative" trials. N Engl J Med 1978; 299: 690-694.
  • 4. Lau J, Schmid CH, Chalmers TC. Cumulative meta-analysis of clinical trials builds evidence for exemplary medical care. J Clin Epidemiol 1995; 48: 45-57.

Author

remove_circle_outline Delete Author
add_circle_outline Add Author

Comment
Do you have any competing interests to declare? *

I/we agree to assign copyright to the Medical Journal of Australia and agree to the Conditions of publication *
I/we agree to the Terms of use of the Medical Journal of Australia *
Email me when people comment on this article

Online responses are no longer available. Please refer to our instructions for authors page for more information.