Cargando…

Sample size in quantitative instrument validation studies: A systematic review of articles published in Scopus, 2021

BACKGROUND: Due to the range of conflicting criteria regarding minimum sample size needed for a scale/questionnaire validation study, the objective of this review is to analyze sample sizes used in published journal articles to contribute a pragmatic perspective to the discussion on sample sizes. ME...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: White, Michael
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9768294/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36568672
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e12223
_version_ 1784854133428191232
author White, Michael
author_facet White, Michael
author_sort White, Michael
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Due to the range of conflicting criteria regarding minimum sample size needed for a scale/questionnaire validation study, the objective of this review is to analyze sample sizes used in published journal articles to contribute a pragmatic perspective to the discussion on sample sizes. METHODS: A sample of 1999 articles published in a Scopus-indexed journal about the validation of a scale or questionnaire during 2021 were analyzed for this study. Abstracts from these articles were tabulated by two data entry professionals and any discrepancies were reviewed by the author. The sample size data was grouped by highest quartile of the journal publishing the article and further sub-categorized based on the inclusion of medical patients or students in each study's population. RESULTS: From the total sample, 1750 articles provided sufficient information in their summary to determine the sample size used. Of these, the majority were published in quartile 1 (784) and quartile 2 (620) journals. Mean values by quartile ranged from 389 (quartile 3) to 2032 (quartile 1), but extreme outliers limited the usefulness of the simple mean. Thus, outlier-removed means were calculated, and in most cases, these sample size values were higher for studies involving students and lower for studies involving patients. DISCUSSION: This study is limited by its focus on a single database and by including all phases of validation from initial quantitative instrument design studies (which tend to have the lowest sample sizes) up to international macro-studies (which can have hundreds of thousands of participants.) Nevertheless, the results of this study provide an additional practical perspective for the academic discussion regarding minimum sample size based on accepted practice.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9768294
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-97682942022-12-22 Sample size in quantitative instrument validation studies: A systematic review of articles published in Scopus, 2021 White, Michael Heliyon Review Article BACKGROUND: Due to the range of conflicting criteria regarding minimum sample size needed for a scale/questionnaire validation study, the objective of this review is to analyze sample sizes used in published journal articles to contribute a pragmatic perspective to the discussion on sample sizes. METHODS: A sample of 1999 articles published in a Scopus-indexed journal about the validation of a scale or questionnaire during 2021 were analyzed for this study. Abstracts from these articles were tabulated by two data entry professionals and any discrepancies were reviewed by the author. The sample size data was grouped by highest quartile of the journal publishing the article and further sub-categorized based on the inclusion of medical patients or students in each study's population. RESULTS: From the total sample, 1750 articles provided sufficient information in their summary to determine the sample size used. Of these, the majority were published in quartile 1 (784) and quartile 2 (620) journals. Mean values by quartile ranged from 389 (quartile 3) to 2032 (quartile 1), but extreme outliers limited the usefulness of the simple mean. Thus, outlier-removed means were calculated, and in most cases, these sample size values were higher for studies involving students and lower for studies involving patients. DISCUSSION: This study is limited by its focus on a single database and by including all phases of validation from initial quantitative instrument design studies (which tend to have the lowest sample sizes) up to international macro-studies (which can have hundreds of thousands of participants.) Nevertheless, the results of this study provide an additional practical perspective for the academic discussion regarding minimum sample size based on accepted practice. Elsevier 2022-12-12 /pmc/articles/PMC9768294/ /pubmed/36568672 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e12223 Text en © 2022 The Author(s) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Review Article
White, Michael
Sample size in quantitative instrument validation studies: A systematic review of articles published in Scopus, 2021
title Sample size in quantitative instrument validation studies: A systematic review of articles published in Scopus, 2021
title_full Sample size in quantitative instrument validation studies: A systematic review of articles published in Scopus, 2021
title_fullStr Sample size in quantitative instrument validation studies: A systematic review of articles published in Scopus, 2021
title_full_unstemmed Sample size in quantitative instrument validation studies: A systematic review of articles published in Scopus, 2021
title_short Sample size in quantitative instrument validation studies: A systematic review of articles published in Scopus, 2021
title_sort sample size in quantitative instrument validation studies: a systematic review of articles published in scopus, 2021
topic Review Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9768294/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36568672
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e12223
work_keys_str_mv AT whitemichael samplesizeinquantitativeinstrumentvalidationstudiesasystematicreviewofarticlespublishedinscopus2021