Bayesian sample size calculation for estimation of the difference between two binomial proportions

Statistical Methods in Medical Research

Volumn 22, Issue 6, 2013, Pages 598-611

  Pezeshk, Hamid ^a,b   Nematollahi, Nader ^c   Maroufy, Vahed ^d   Marriott, Paul ^d   Gittins, John ^e  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEHRAN   (Iran)

^b INSTITUTE FOR RESEARCH IN FUNDAMENTAL SCIENCES IPM   (Iran)

^c ALLAMEH TABATABA'I UNIVERSITY   (Iran)

^d UNIVERSITY OF WATERLOO   (Canada)

^e UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

binomial distribution; clinical trial; Dirichlet distribution; expected net benefit; fully Bayesian approach; sample size determination

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BAYES THEOREM; BINOMIAL DISTRIBUTION; CALCULATION; CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); DIRICHLET DISTRIBUTION; HUMAN; METHODOLOGY; PROBABILITY; SAMPLE SIZE; STATISTICAL DISTRIBUTION;

BINOMIAL DISTRIBUTION; CLINICAL TRIAL; DIRICHLET DISTRIBUTION; EXPECTED NET BENEFIT; FULLY BAYESIAN APPROACH; SAMPLE SIZE DETERMINATION;

BAYES THEOREM; CLINICAL TRIALS AS TOPIC; MODELS, THEORETICAL; SAMPLE SIZE;

EID: 84888585255     PISSN: 09622802     EISSN: 14770334     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0962280211399562     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Adcock CJ. Sample size determination; a review. The Statistician. 1997 ; 46: 261-283
2. Adcock CJ. A Bayesian approach to calculating sample sizes. The Statistician. 1988 ; 37: 433-439
3. Spiegelhalter DJ, Freeman LS, Parmar MKB. Bayesian approaches to randomised trials. J R Stat Soc A. 1994 ; 157: 357-416
4. Grundy PM, Healy MJR, Rees DH. Economic choice of the amount of experimentation. J R Stat Soc A. 1956 ; 18: 32-38
5. Lindley DV. The choice of sample size. The Statistician. 1997 ; 46: 129-138
6. Gittins JC, Pezeshk H. How large should a clinical trial be?. The Statistician. 2000 ; 49: 177-187
7. Pezeshk H, Gittins JC. A Bayesian approach to the determination of the number of subsequent users of a new treatment. Stat Method Med Res. 2006 ; 15: 585-592
8. Pezeshk H, Gittins JC. A cost-benefit approach to the amount of experimentation of clinical trials. Drug Inf J. 2006 ; 40: 407-411
9. Willan AR. Clinical decision making and expected value of information. Clin Trials. 2007 ; 4: 279-285
10. Kikuchi T, Pezeshk H, Gittins JC. A Bayesian cost-benefit approach to the determination of sample size in clinical trials. Stat Med. 2008 ; 27: 68-82
11. Adcock CJ. The Bayesian approach to the determination of sample sizes - some comments on the article by Joseph, Wolfson, and Berger. The Statistician. 1995 ; 44: 155-161
12. Joseph L, Wolfson DB, du Berger R. Sample size calculations for binomial proportions via a highest posterior density intervals. Stat Med. 1995 ; 44: 143-154
13. Pham-Gia T, Turkkan N. Sample size determination in bayesian analysis. The Statistician. 1992 ; 41: 389-392
14. Gittins JC, Pezeshk H. A decision theoretic approach to sample size determination in clinical trials. J Biopharm Stat. 2002 ; 12 (4). 535-551
15. Joseph L, du Berger R, Bélisle P. Bayesian and mixed bayesian/likelihood criteria for sample size determination. Stat Med. 1997 ; 16: 769-781
16. Pham-Gia T, Turkkan N. Determination of exact sample sizes in the bayesian estimation of the difference of two proportions. The Statistician. 2003 ; 52: 131-150
17. Pezeshk H, Gittins JC. A fully bayesian approach to calculating sample sizes for clinical trials with binary responses. Drug Inf J. 2002 ; 36: 143-150
18. Pezeshk H. Bayesian techniques for sample size determination in clinical trials; a short review. Stat Methods Med Res. 2003 ; 12 (6). 489-504
19. Appell P, Kampe de Feriet J Hypergéométriques et Hypershériques. Polynomes d'Hermite. Paris: Gauthier - Villars ; 1926 :
20. Pezeshk H, Maroufy V. A fully bayesian sample size determination for inference of the difference of two binomial proportions. Iran Int J Sci. 2005 ; 6 (2). 73-82