Optimal type i and type II error pairs when the available sample size is fixed

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

Volumn 66, Issue 8, 2013, Pages

  Ioannidis, John P A ^a,b   Hozo, Iztok ^c   Djulbegovic, Benjamin ^d,e  

^a STANFORD UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b STANFORD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c INDIANA UNIVERSITY NORTHWEST   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA   (United States)

^e H LEE MOFFITT CANCER CENTER AND RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United States)

Author keywords

False negative; False positive; Optimization; Power calculations; Type I error; Type II error

Indexed keywords

ANALYTICAL ERROR; ARTICLE; CASE CONTROL STUDY; EFFECT SIZE; MATHEMATICAL MODEL; NOMOGRAM; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); SAMPLE SIZE; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STATISTICAL MODEL;

EID: 84879836789     PISSN: 08954356     EISSN: 18785921     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2013.03.002     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. S. Piantadosi Clinical trials: a methodologic perspective 2nd ed. 2005 Wiley Hoboken, NJ
2. C.L. Meinert Clinical trials: design, conduct, and analysis 1986 Oxford University Press Oxford, UK
3. J.D. Storey, and R. Tibshirani Statistical significance for genomewide studies Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 100 2003 9440 9445 (Pubitemid 37033947)
4. C.J. Hoggart, T.G. Clark, M. De Iorio, J.C. Whittaker, and D.J. Balding Genome-wide significance for dense SNP and resequencing data Genet Epidemiol 32 2008 179 185 (Pubitemid 351288034)
5. P. Kraft, E. Zeggini, and J.P. Ioannidis Replication in genome-wide association studies Stat Sci 24 2009 561 573
6. J.P. Ioannidis Why most published research findings are false PLoS Med 2 2005 e124
7. P.R. Burton, A.L. Hansell, I. Fortier, T.A. Manolio, M.J. Khoury, and J. Little Size matters: just how big is BIG?: quantifying realistic sample size requirements for human genome epidemiology Int J Epidemiol 38 2009 263 273
8. M.J. Khoury, J. Little, M. Gwinn, and J.P. Ioannidis On the synthesis and interpretation of consistent but weak gene-disease associations in the era of genome-wide association studies Int J Epidemiol 36 2007 439 445 (Pubitemid 47062866)
9. G.C. Siontis, and J.P. Ioannidis Risk factors and interventions with statistically significant tiny effects Int J Epidemiol 40 2011 1292 1307
10. J.P. Ioannidis Excess significance bias in the literature on brain volume abnormalities Arch Gen Psychiatry 68 2011 773 780
11. F. Lovat, N. Valeri, and C.M. Croce MicroRNAs in the pathogenesis of cancer Semin Oncol 38 2011 724 733
12. J.A. Sterne, and G. Davey Smith Sifting the evidence - what's wrong with significance tests? BMJ 322 2001 226 231 (Pubitemid 32116172)
13. L. Held A nomogram for P values BMC Med Res Methodol 10 2010 21
14. P. Boffetta, J.K. McLaughlin, C. La Vecchia, R.E. Tarone, L. Lipworth, and W.J. Blot False-positive results in cancer epidemiology: a plea for epistemological modesty J Natl Cancer Inst 100 2008 988 995 (Pubitemid 352019795)
15. J.P. Ioannidis, R. Tarone, and J.K. McLaughlin The false-positive to false-negative ratio in epidemiologic studies Epidemiology 22 2011 450 456
16. R. Tsang, L. Colley, and L.D. Lynd Inadequate statistical power to detect clinically significant differences in adverse event rates in randomized controlled trials J Clin Epidemiol 62 2009 609 616
17. P.L. Bedard, M.K. Krzyzanowska, M. Pintilie, and I.F. Tannock Statistical power of negative randomized controlled trials presented at American Society for Clinical Oncology annual meetings J Clin Oncol 25 2007 3482 3487 (Pubitemid 47310887)
18. D. Moher, C.S. Dulberg, and G.A. Wells Statistical power, sample size, and their reporting in randomized controlled trials JAMA 272 1994 122 124 (Pubitemid 24206043)
19. B. Djulbegovic, A. Kumar, A. Magazin, A.T. Schroen, H. Soares, and I. Hozo Optimism bias leads to inconclusive results - an empirical study J Clin Epidemiol 64 2011 583 593
20. N.S. Young, J.P. Ioannidis, and O. Al-Ubaydli Why current publication practices may distort science PLoS Med 5 2008 e201
21. T. Pfeiffer, and R. Hoffmann Large-scale assessment of the effect of popularity on the reliability of research PLoS One 4 2009 e5996
22. J.P. Ioannidis, and M.J. Khoury Improving validation practices in omics research Science 334 2011 1230 1232
23. I. Hozo, and B. Djulbegovic When is diagnostic testing inappropriate or irrational? Acceptable regret approach Med Decis Making 28 2008 540 553 (Pubitemid 351990003)
24. B. Djulbegovic, and I. Hozo When should potentially false research findings be considered acceptable? PLoS Med 4 2007 e26
25. A. Tsalatsanis, I. Hozo, A. Vickers, and B. Djulbegovic A regret theory approach to decision curve analysis: a novel method for eliciting decision makers' preferences and decision-making BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 10 2010 51
26. R. Amalberti, Y. Auroy, D. Berwick, and P. Barach Five system barriers to achieving ultrasafe health care Ann Intern Med 142 2005 756 764 (Pubitemid 40593778)
27. A.G. Day-Williams, and E. Zeggini The effect of next-generation sequencing technology on complex trait research Eur J Clin Invest 41 2011 561 567
28. Y. Benjamini, and Y. Hochberg Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing J R Stat Soc Ser B 57 1995 289 300
29. B. Efron Large-scale inference 2010 Cambridge University Press Cambridge, UK
30. J.D. Storey A direct approach to false discovery rates J R Stat Soc Ser B 64 2002 479 498
31. C. Genovese, and L. Wasserman Operating characteristics and extensions of the false discovery rate procedure J R Stat Soc Ser B Stat Meth 64 2002 499 517