Do sample size calculations in longitudinal orthodontic trials use the advantages of this study design?

Longitudinal Orthodontic trials Sample size

Journal

The Angle orthodontist
ISSN: 1945-7103
Titre abrégé: Angle Orthod
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0370550

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
01 05 2022
Historique:
accepted: 01 12 2021
received: 01 09 2021
pubmed: 5 2 2022
medline: 19 4 2022
entrez: 4 2 2022
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

To examine whether optimal calculations of the sample size are being used in longitudinal orthodontic trials. Longitudinal orthodontic trials with a minimum of three time points of outcome assessment published between January 1, 2017, and December 30, 2020, were sourced from a single electronic database. Study characteristics at the level of each trial were undertaken independently and in duplicate. Descriptive statistics and summary values were calculated. Inferential statistics (Fisher's exact test and logistic regression) were applied to detect associations between reporting of a sample size calculation and the study characteristics. A total of 147 trials were analyzed; 75.5% of these trials reported a sample size calculation with none reporting optimal sample size calculation for longitudinal trials. Most of the longitudinal orthodontic trials did not report the correlation and the number of longitudinal measurements in calculating the sample size. An association between reporting of a sample size calculation (yes or no) and the type of journal (orthodontic and non-orthodontic) was detected with higher odds of reporting a sample size calculation in orthodontic journals than in non-orthodontic journals (3.04; 95% confidence interval, 1.4-6.59; P < .01). The findings of this study highlighted that the undertaking of optimal sample size calculations in longitudinal orthodontic trials is being underused. Greater awareness of the variables required for undertaking the correct sample size calculation in these trials is required to reduce suboptimal research practices.

Identifiants

pubmed: 35119470
pii: 477224
doi: 10.2319/091321-707.1
pmc: PMC9020395
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

402-408

Informations de copyright

© 2022 by The EH Angle Education and Research Foundation, Inc.

Références

Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2010 May;25(5):1388-93
pubmed: 20067907
PLoS One. 2014 Jan 21;9(1):e85949
pubmed: 24465806
Eur J Orthod. 2014 Feb;36(1):67-73
pubmed: 23460731
J Dent Res. 2021 Mar;100(3):245-252
pubmed: 33054504
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2013 Jul 31;13:100
pubmed: 23902644
Biochem Med (Zagreb). 2021 Feb 15;31(1):010502
pubmed: 33380887
BMJ. 2010 Mar 23;340:c869
pubmed: 20332511
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2011 Sep;140(3):309-16.e2
pubmed: 21889075
Test (Madr). 2009 May 1;18(1):1-43
pubmed: 21218187
JAMA. 2002 Jul 17;288(3):358-62
pubmed: 12117401
J Stat Softw. 2013 Sep;54(10):
pubmed: 24403868
BMJ. 2009 Oct 06;339:b3985
pubmed: 19808754
PLoS Med. 2016 Jun 21;13(6):e1002049
pubmed: 27328301
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2015 Jan;147(1):146-9
pubmed: 25533082
J Am Stat Assoc. 1992 Dec 1;87(420):1209-1226
pubmed: 24790282
Trials. 2019 Sep 13;20(1):566
pubmed: 31519202
Psychol Bull. 1992 Jul;112(1):155-9
pubmed: 19565683
Shanghai Arch Psychiatry. 2013 Aug;25(4):259-62
pubmed: 24991165
Stat Med. 1992 Jun 15;11(8):1099-102
pubmed: 1496197
Lancet. 2005 Apr 9-15;365(9467):1348-53
pubmed: 15823387
J Clin Epidemiol. 2010 Aug;63(8):834-40
pubmed: 20346629

Auteurs

Articles similaires

Humans Meta-Analysis as Topic Sample Size Models, Statistical Computer Simulation
Humans Self-Control Longitudinal Studies Child, Preschool Child

Why experimental variation in neuroimaging should be embraced.

Gregory Kiar, Jeanette A Mumford, Ting Xu et al.
1.00
Humans Neuroimaging Brain Reproducibility of Results Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Classifications MeSH