New approaches to increase statistical power in TBI trials: Insights from the IMPACT study

Author(s):  
Andrew I. R. Maas ◽  
H. F. Lingsma ◽  
2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Curtis David Von Gunten ◽  
Bruce D Bartholow

A primary psychometric concern with laboratory-based inhibition tasks has been their reliability. However, a reliable measure may not be necessary or sufficient for reliably detecting effects (statistical power). The current study used a bootstrap sampling approach to systematically examine how the number of participants, the number of trials, the magnitude of an effect, and study design (between- vs. within-subject) jointly contribute to power in five commonly used inhibition tasks. The results demonstrate the shortcomings of relying solely on measurement reliability when determining the number of trials to use in an inhibition task: high internal reliability can be accompanied with low power and low reliability can be accompanied with high power. For instance, adding additional trials once sufficient reliability has been reached can result in large gains in power. The dissociation between reliability and power was particularly apparent in between-subject designs where the number of participants contributed greatly to power but little to reliability, and where the number of trials contributed greatly to reliability but only modestly (depending on the task) to power. For between-subject designs, the probability of detecting small-to-medium-sized effects with 150 participants (total) was generally less than 55%. However, effect size was positively associated with number of trials. Thus, researchers have some control over effect size and this needs to be considered when conducting power analyses using analytic methods that take such effect sizes as an argument. Results are discussed in the context of recent claims regarding the role of inhibition tasks in experimental and individual difference designs.


1999 ◽  
Vol 30 (2) ◽  
pp. 129-146 ◽  
Author(s):  
N. R. Nawaz ◽  
A. J. Adeloye ◽  
M. Montaseri

In this paper, we report on the results of an investigation into the impacts of climate change on the storage-yield relationships for two multiple-reservoir systems, one in England and the other in Iran. The impact study uses established protocol and obtains perturbed monthly inflow series using a simple runoff coefficient approach which accounts for non-evaporative losses in the catchment, and a number of recently published GCM-based scenarios. The multi-reservoir analysis is based on the sequent-peak algorithm which has been modified to analyse multiple reservoirs and to accommodate explicitly performance norms and reservoir surface fluxes, i.e. evaporation and rainfall. As a consequence, it was also possible to assess the effect of including reservoir surface fluxes on the storage-yield functions. The results showed that, under baseline conditions, consideration of net evaporation will require lower storages for the English system and higher storages for the Iranian system. However, with perturbed hydroclimatology different impacts were obtained depending on the systems' yield and reliability. Possible explanations are offered for the observed behaviours.


Author(s):  
K. K. Yeo

This chapter challenges the ‘received’ view that traces the expansion of the dominant theologies of the European and North American colonial powers and their missionaries into the Majority World. When they arrived, these Westerners found ancient Christian traditions and pre-existing spiritualities, linguistic and cultural forms, which questioned their Eurocentric presumptions, and energized new approaches to interpreting the sacred texts of Christianity. The emergence of ‘creative tensions’ in global encounters are a mechanism for expressing (D)issent against attempts to close down or normalize local Bible-reading traditions. This chapter points to the elements which establish a creative tension between indigenizing Majority World approaches to the Bible and those described in the ‘orthodox’ narrative, including: self-theologizing and communal readings; concepts of the Spirit world and human flourishing; the impact of multiple contexts, vernacular languages, sociopolitical and ethno-national identities, and power/marginalization structures; and ‘framing’ public and ecological issues.


2002 ◽  
Vol 181 (1) ◽  
pp. 17-21 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. J. Ziguras ◽  
G. W. Stuart ◽  
A. C. Jackson

BackgroundEvidence on the impact of case management is contradictory.AimsTo discuss two different systematic reviews (one conducted by the authors and one conducted through the Cochrane collaboration) that came to contradictory conclusions about the impact of case management in mental health services.MethodWe summarised the findings of the two reviews with respect to case management effectiveness, examined key methodological differences between the two approaches and discuss the impact of these on the validity of the results.ResultsThe differences in conclusions between the two reviews result from the differences in inclusion criteria, namely non-randomised trials, data from unpublished scales and data from variables with skewed distributions. The theoretical and empirical effects of these are discussed.ConclusionsSystematic reviewers may face a trade-off between the application of strict criteria for the inclusion of studies and the amount of data available for analysis and hence statistical power. The available research suggests that case management is generally effective.


PEDIATRICS ◽  
1993 ◽  
Vol 92 (2) ◽  
pp. 300-301
Author(s):  
DOREN FREDRICKSON

To the Editor.— I wish to comment on the study reported by Cronenwett et al,1 which was a fascinating prospective study among married white women who planned to breast-feed. Women were randomly selected to perform either exdusive breast-feeding or partial breast-feeding with bottled human milk supplements to determine the impact of infant temperament and limited bottle-feeding on breast-feeding duration. The authors admit that small sample size and lack of statistical power make a false-negative possible.


Dose-Response ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 155932581771531
Author(s):  
Steven B. Kim ◽  
Nathan Sanders

For many dose–response studies, large samples are not available. Particularly, when the outcome of interest is binary rather than continuous, a large sample size is required to provide evidence for hormesis at low doses. In a small or moderate sample, we can gain statistical power by the use of a parametric model. It is an efficient approach when it is correctly specified, but it can be misleading otherwise. This research is motivated by the fact that data points at high experimental doses have too much contribution in the hypothesis testing when a parametric model is misspecified. In dose–response analyses, to account for model uncertainty and to reduce the impact of model misspecification, averaging multiple models have been widely discussed in the literature. In this article, we propose to average semiparametric models when we test for hormesis at low doses. We show the different characteristics of averaging parametric models and averaging semiparametric models by simulation. We apply the proposed method to real data, and we show that P values from averaged semiparametric models are more credible than P values from averaged parametric methods. When the true dose–response relationship does not follow a parametric assumption, the proposed method can be an alternative robust approach.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document