An audit of sample sizes for pilot and feasibility trials being undertaken in the United Kingdom registered in the United Kingdom Clinical Research Network database

Sophie A M Billingham, Amy L Whitehead, Steven A Julious, Sophie A M Billingham, Amy L Whitehead, Steven A Julious

Abstract

Background: There is little published guidance as to the sample size required for a pilot or feasibility trial despite the fact that a sample size justification is a key element in the design of a trial. A sample size justification should give the minimum number of participants needed in order to meet the objectives of the trial. This paper seeks to describe the target sample sizes set for pilot and feasibility randomised controlled trials, currently running within the United Kingdom.

Methods: Data were gathered from the United Kingdom Clinical Research Network (UKCRN) database using the search terms 'pilot' and 'feasibility'. From this search 513 studies were assessed for eligibility of which 79 met the inclusion criteria. Where the data summary on the UKCRN Database was incomplete, data were also gathered from: the International Standardised Randomised Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN) register; the clinicaltrials.gov website and the website of the funders. For 62 of the trials, it was necessary to contact members of the research team by email to ensure completeness.

Results: Of the 79 trials analysed, 50 (63.3%) were labelled as pilot trials, 25 (31.6%) feasibility and 14 were described as both pilot and feasibility trials. The majority had two arms (n = 68, 86.1%) and the two most common endpoints were continuous (n = 45, 57.0%) and dichotomous (n = 31, 39.2%). Pilot trials were found to have a smaller sample size per arm (median = 30, range = 8 to 114 participants) than feasibility trials (median = 36, range = 10 to 300 participants). By type of endpoint, across feasibility and pilot trials, the median sample size per arm was 36 (range = 10 to 300 participants) for trials with a dichotomous endpoint and 30 (range = 8 to 114 participants) for trials with a continuous endpoint. Publicly funded pilot trials appear to be larger than industry funded pilot trials: median sample sizes of 33 (range = 15 to 114 participants) and 25 (range = 8 to 100 participants) respectively.

Conclusion: All studies should have a sample size justification. Not all studies however need to have a sample size calculation. For pilot and feasibility trials, while a sample size justification is important, a formal sample size calculation may not be appropriate. The results in this paper describe the observed sample sizes in feasibility and pilot randomised controlled trials on the UKCRN Database.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow diagram showing the flow of trials through the review.

References

    1. NETSCC definition of pilot and feasibility studies. [ (date last accessed, 16 August 2013)]
    1. Arain M, Campbell MJ, Cooper CL, Lancaster GA. What is a pilot or feasibility study? a review of current practice and editorial policy. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2010;10:67. doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-10-67. (date last accessed 19 August 2013)
    1. Stallard N. Optimal sample sizes for phase II clinical trials and pilot studies. Stat Med. 2012;31:1031–1042. doi: 10.1002/sim.4357.
    1. Thabane L, Ma J, Chu R, Cheng J, Ismaila A, Rios LP. et al.A tutorial on pilot studies: the what, why and how. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2010;10:1. doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-10-1. (date last accessed 19 August 2013)
    1. Prescott PA, Soeken KL. The potential uses of pilot work. Nurs Res. 1989;38:60–62. doi: 10.1097/00006199-198901000-00015.
    1. Hertzog MA. Considerations in determining sample size for pilot studies. Res Nurs Health. 2008;31:180–191. doi: 10.1002/nur.20247.
    1. Julious SA, Patterson SD. Sample sizes for estimation in clinical research. Pharm Stat. 2004;3:213–215. doi: 10.1002/pst.125.
    1. Browne RH. On the use of a pilot sample for sample size determination. Stat Med. 1995;14:1933–1940. doi: 10.1002/sim.4780141709.
    1. Julious SA. Sample size of 12 per group rule of thumb for a pilot study. Pharm Stat. 2005;4:287–291. doi: 10.1002/pst.185.
    1. Sim J, Lewis M. The size of a pilot study for a clinical trial should be calculated in relation to considerations of precision and efficiency. J Clin Epidemiol. 2012;65:301–308. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2011.07.011.
    1. Altman DG. Statistics and ethics in medical research lll: How large a sample? Br Med J. 1980;281:1336–1338. doi: 10.1136/bmj.281.6251.1336.
    1. Lancaster GA, Dodd S, Williamson PR. Design and analysis of pilot studies: recommendations for good practice. J Eval Clin Pract. 2002;10(2):307–312.
    1. UKCRN. (date last accessed, 20 March 2013)
    1. NIHR. NIHR clinical research network portfolio. 2013. [cited 2013 15 March]; Available from: , [date last accessed 20th March 2013]
    1. SPSS Inc. Released 2009. PASW statistics for windows, version 18.0. Chicago: SPSS Inc; 2009.
    1. Moore CG, Carter RE, Nietert PJ, Stewart PW. Recommendations for planning pilot studies in clinical and translational research. Clin Transl Sci. 2011;4(5):332–337. doi: 10.1111/j.1752-8062.2011.00347.x.
    1. Bourgeois FT, Murthy S, Mandl KD. Outcome reporting among drug trials registered in . Ann Intern Med. 2010;153:158–166. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-153-3-201008030-00006.
    1. Campbell MJ, Julious SA, Altman DG. Sample sizes for dichotomous, ordered categorical and continuous outcomes in two group comparisons. Br Med J. 1995;311:1145–1148. doi: 10.1136/bmj.311.7013.1145. With Erratrum 1996, 312, 96.

Source: PubMed

3
Subskrybuj