Cargando…

Methods for Specifying the Target Difference in a Randomised Controlled Trial: The Difference ELicitation in TriAls (DELTA) Systematic Review

BACKGROUND: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are widely accepted as the preferred study design for evaluating healthcare interventions. When the sample size is determined, a (target) difference is typically specified that the RCT is designed to detect. This provides reassurance that the study wil...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hislop, Jenni, Adewuyi, Temitope E., Vale, Luke D., Harrild, Kirsten, Fraser, Cynthia, Gurung, Tara, Altman, Douglas G., Briggs, Andrew H., Fayers, Peter, Ramsay, Craig R., Norrie, John D., Harvey, Ian M., Buckley, Brian, Cook, Jonathan A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4019477/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24824338
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1001645
_version_ 1782480169011773440
author Hislop, Jenni
Adewuyi, Temitope E.
Vale, Luke D.
Harrild, Kirsten
Fraser, Cynthia
Gurung, Tara
Altman, Douglas G.
Briggs, Andrew H.
Fayers, Peter
Ramsay, Craig R.
Norrie, John D.
Harvey, Ian M.
Buckley, Brian
Cook, Jonathan A.
author_facet Hislop, Jenni
Adewuyi, Temitope E.
Vale, Luke D.
Harrild, Kirsten
Fraser, Cynthia
Gurung, Tara
Altman, Douglas G.
Briggs, Andrew H.
Fayers, Peter
Ramsay, Craig R.
Norrie, John D.
Harvey, Ian M.
Buckley, Brian
Cook, Jonathan A.
author_sort Hislop, Jenni
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are widely accepted as the preferred study design for evaluating healthcare interventions. When the sample size is determined, a (target) difference is typically specified that the RCT is designed to detect. This provides reassurance that the study will be informative, i.e., should such a difference exist, it is likely to be detected with the required statistical precision. The aim of this review was to identify potential methods for specifying the target difference in an RCT sample size calculation. METHODS AND FINDINGS: A comprehensive systematic review of medical and non-medical literature was carried out for methods that could be used to specify the target difference for an RCT sample size calculation. The databases searched were MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, the Cochrane Methodology Register, PsycINFO, Science Citation Index, EconLit, the Education Resources Information Center (ERIC), and Scopus (for in-press publications); the search period was from 1966 or the earliest date covered, to between November 2010 and January 2011. Additionally, textbooks addressing the methodology of clinical trials and International Conference on Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Registration of Pharmaceuticals for Human Use (ICH) tripartite guidelines for clinical trials were also consulted. A narrative synthesis of methods was produced. Studies that described a method that could be used for specifying an important and/or realistic difference were included. The search identified 11,485 potentially relevant articles from the databases searched. Of these, 1,434 were selected for full-text assessment, and a further nine were identified from other sources. Fifteen clinical trial textbooks and the ICH tripartite guidelines were also reviewed. In total, 777 studies were included, and within them, seven methods were identified—anchor, distribution, health economic, opinion-seeking, pilot study, review of the evidence base, and standardised effect size. CONCLUSIONS: A variety of methods are available that researchers can use for specifying the target difference in an RCT sample size calculation. Appropriate methods may vary depending on the aim (e.g., specifying an important difference versus a realistic difference), context (e.g., research question and availability of data), and underlying framework adopted (e.g., Bayesian versus conventional statistical approach). Guidance on the use of each method is given. No single method provides a perfect solution for all contexts. Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4019477
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-40194772014-05-16 Methods for Specifying the Target Difference in a Randomised Controlled Trial: The Difference ELicitation in TriAls (DELTA) Systematic Review Hislop, Jenni Adewuyi, Temitope E. Vale, Luke D. Harrild, Kirsten Fraser, Cynthia Gurung, Tara Altman, Douglas G. Briggs, Andrew H. Fayers, Peter Ramsay, Craig R. Norrie, John D. Harvey, Ian M. Buckley, Brian Cook, Jonathan A. PLoS Med Research Article BACKGROUND: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are widely accepted as the preferred study design for evaluating healthcare interventions. When the sample size is determined, a (target) difference is typically specified that the RCT is designed to detect. This provides reassurance that the study will be informative, i.e., should such a difference exist, it is likely to be detected with the required statistical precision. The aim of this review was to identify potential methods for specifying the target difference in an RCT sample size calculation. METHODS AND FINDINGS: A comprehensive systematic review of medical and non-medical literature was carried out for methods that could be used to specify the target difference for an RCT sample size calculation. The databases searched were MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, the Cochrane Methodology Register, PsycINFO, Science Citation Index, EconLit, the Education Resources Information Center (ERIC), and Scopus (for in-press publications); the search period was from 1966 or the earliest date covered, to between November 2010 and January 2011. Additionally, textbooks addressing the methodology of clinical trials and International Conference on Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Registration of Pharmaceuticals for Human Use (ICH) tripartite guidelines for clinical trials were also consulted. A narrative synthesis of methods was produced. Studies that described a method that could be used for specifying an important and/or realistic difference were included. The search identified 11,485 potentially relevant articles from the databases searched. Of these, 1,434 were selected for full-text assessment, and a further nine were identified from other sources. Fifteen clinical trial textbooks and the ICH tripartite guidelines were also reviewed. In total, 777 studies were included, and within them, seven methods were identified—anchor, distribution, health economic, opinion-seeking, pilot study, review of the evidence base, and standardised effect size. CONCLUSIONS: A variety of methods are available that researchers can use for specifying the target difference in an RCT sample size calculation. Appropriate methods may vary depending on the aim (e.g., specifying an important difference versus a realistic difference), context (e.g., research question and availability of data), and underlying framework adopted (e.g., Bayesian versus conventional statistical approach). Guidance on the use of each method is given. No single method provides a perfect solution for all contexts. Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary Public Library of Science 2014-05-13 /pmc/articles/PMC4019477/ /pubmed/24824338 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1001645 Text en © 2014 Hislop et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Hislop, Jenni
Adewuyi, Temitope E.
Vale, Luke D.
Harrild, Kirsten
Fraser, Cynthia
Gurung, Tara
Altman, Douglas G.
Briggs, Andrew H.
Fayers, Peter
Ramsay, Craig R.
Norrie, John D.
Harvey, Ian M.
Buckley, Brian
Cook, Jonathan A.
Methods for Specifying the Target Difference in a Randomised Controlled Trial: The Difference ELicitation in TriAls (DELTA) Systematic Review
title Methods for Specifying the Target Difference in a Randomised Controlled Trial: The Difference ELicitation in TriAls (DELTA) Systematic Review
title_full Methods for Specifying the Target Difference in a Randomised Controlled Trial: The Difference ELicitation in TriAls (DELTA) Systematic Review
title_fullStr Methods for Specifying the Target Difference in a Randomised Controlled Trial: The Difference ELicitation in TriAls (DELTA) Systematic Review
title_full_unstemmed Methods for Specifying the Target Difference in a Randomised Controlled Trial: The Difference ELicitation in TriAls (DELTA) Systematic Review
title_short Methods for Specifying the Target Difference in a Randomised Controlled Trial: The Difference ELicitation in TriAls (DELTA) Systematic Review
title_sort methods for specifying the target difference in a randomised controlled trial: the difference elicitation in trials (delta) systematic review
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4019477/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24824338
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1001645
work_keys_str_mv AT hislopjenni methodsforspecifyingthetargetdifferenceinarandomisedcontrolledtrialthedifferenceelicitationintrialsdeltasystematicreview
AT adewuyitemitopee methodsforspecifyingthetargetdifferenceinarandomisedcontrolledtrialthedifferenceelicitationintrialsdeltasystematicreview
AT valeluked methodsforspecifyingthetargetdifferenceinarandomisedcontrolledtrialthedifferenceelicitationintrialsdeltasystematicreview
AT harrildkirsten methodsforspecifyingthetargetdifferenceinarandomisedcontrolledtrialthedifferenceelicitationintrialsdeltasystematicreview
AT frasercynthia methodsforspecifyingthetargetdifferenceinarandomisedcontrolledtrialthedifferenceelicitationintrialsdeltasystematicreview
AT gurungtara methodsforspecifyingthetargetdifferenceinarandomisedcontrolledtrialthedifferenceelicitationintrialsdeltasystematicreview
AT altmandouglasg methodsforspecifyingthetargetdifferenceinarandomisedcontrolledtrialthedifferenceelicitationintrialsdeltasystematicreview
AT briggsandrewh methodsforspecifyingthetargetdifferenceinarandomisedcontrolledtrialthedifferenceelicitationintrialsdeltasystematicreview
AT fayerspeter methodsforspecifyingthetargetdifferenceinarandomisedcontrolledtrialthedifferenceelicitationintrialsdeltasystematicreview
AT ramsaycraigr methodsforspecifyingthetargetdifferenceinarandomisedcontrolledtrialthedifferenceelicitationintrialsdeltasystematicreview
AT norriejohnd methodsforspecifyingthetargetdifferenceinarandomisedcontrolledtrialthedifferenceelicitationintrialsdeltasystematicreview
AT harveyianm methodsforspecifyingthetargetdifferenceinarandomisedcontrolledtrialthedifferenceelicitationintrialsdeltasystematicreview
AT buckleybrian methodsforspecifyingthetargetdifferenceinarandomisedcontrolledtrialthedifferenceelicitationintrialsdeltasystematicreview
AT cookjonathana methodsforspecifyingthetargetdifferenceinarandomisedcontrolledtrialthedifferenceelicitationintrialsdeltasystematicreview
AT methodsforspecifyingthetargetdifferenceinarandomisedcontrolledtrialthedifferenceelicitationintrialsdeltasystematicreview