Tags:
create new tag
, view all tags, tagging instructions
Return to CTSpedia Web Home

The reference form that you need to complete is on the bottom of this page.

PLEASE scroll down for the form.

ReferencesCTSpediaForm edit

Title Ethics and sample size.
Author Bacchetti P, Wolf LE, Segal MR, McCulloch CE
Year 2005
Journal Am J Epidemiol
Volume 161
Issue

Pages 105-110
Publisher

Link_for_PDF_for_Education

Link for Open Access

DOI

Link for DOI

Web_Access_Paper http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/content/161/2/105.full
Contributed_by Peter Bacchetti
Commentary This presented a refutation the argument that having too small a sample size makes studies unethical because they do not produce enough scientific or clinical value to justify the burdens accepted by participants. It showed that the ratio of projected value to participant burden can only worsen as sample size increases, because power (and other measures of projected value) have diminishing marginal returns as a function of sample size, while the projected total burden on participants increases in proportion to sample size. The exposition used the equivalence that total study value exceeds total participant burden if and only if value per participant exceeds burden per participant. An accompanying commentary raised objections, notably arguing that projected value could have increasing marginal returns with sample size if participants' altruistic satisfaction were included in projected study value, because they often value their own contribution without consideration of how small a fraction they themselves made up of the total sample. A rejoinder addressed the objections, in particular noting that participants' altruistic satisfaction cannot be included as part of a study's projected scientific or clinical value when assessing whether it is sufficient to justify the participant burden. Later work established diminishing marginal returns for a wide array of measures of projected study value that have been proposed for use in sample size planning (Bacchetti P, McCulloch? CE, Segal MR. Simple, defensible sample sizes based on cost efficiency. Biometrics, 64: 577-594, 2008), including both frequentist and Bayesian perspectives, as well as both decision theoretic and evidential frameworks. Further discussion of the issues is available here.
Additional_Information

Reference_Subject Biostat_Ethics
Disclaimer The views expressed within CTSpedia are those of the author and must not be taken to represent policy or guidance on the behalf of any organization or institution with which the author is affiliated.
Topic revision: r2 - 26 Mar 2013 - 00:50:26 - PeterBacchetti
 

Copyright & by the contributing authors. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
Ideas, requests, problems regarding CTSPedia? Send feedback