Submission Instructions: Submit The Math How You Got To The
Submission Instructions1 Submit The Math How You Got To The Final Co
Submit the math how you got to the final conclusion. If your conclusion will not follow the math calculation, no points will be given; please double-check your answer for consistency and clarity. Ensure your calculations make sense to you before submitting. Late submissions are not permitted except in cases of medical or other life emergencies, for which proof must be provided. Please review the assignment-specific guidelines, university policies, and course syllabus for additional instructions.
This assignment comprises three separate questions related to sample size calculations for different study designs and outcomes. Each requires applying statistical formulas to determine appropriate sample sizes based on given parameters, ensuring the statistical validity of the study results.
Paper For Above instruction
Sample size determination is a fundamental aspect of designing epidemiological and clinical research. Accurate calculation ensures that studies are adequately powered to detect meaningful effects or accurately estimate parameters while avoiding unnecessary resource expenditure. This paper analyzes three distinct scenarios involving sample size calculations: estimating a mean with continuous outcomes, estimating a proportion with dichotomous outcomes, and comparing two means from independent samples. Each example utilizes established statistical formulas, demonstrating how to tailor sample sizes according to the desired confidence level, margin of error, variability, and other study-specific parameters.
Sample Size Calculation for Estimating a Mean with Continuous Outcomes
The first scenario involves estimating the average diastolic blood pressure (DBP) in pregnant women with a specified level of precision. The goal is to determine the minimum number of participants required to estimate the population mean with a 95% confidence interval and a margin of error of 3 points. Using the formula for sample size estimation of a mean:
N = (Zα/2 * σ / E)2
where:
- Zα/2 is the z-score corresponding to the desired confidence level (for 95%, Z0.025 ≈ 1.96)
- σ is the estimated standard deviation (9.70 from literature)
- E is the desired margin of error (3 points)
Plugging in these values:
N = (1.96 9.70 / 3)2 ≈ (1.96 3.233)^2 ≈ (6.338)^2 ≈ 40.16
Thus, approximately 41 pregnant women are needed to estimate the mean DBP within 3 points with 95% confidence.
Sample Size Calculation for Estimating a Proportion with Dichotomous Outcomes
The second scenario pertains to estimating the proportion of freshmen smokers at a university, with no prior estimate of the prevalence. The aim is to obtain a confidence interval within 5% of the true proportion, with 95% confidence. When the proportion is unknown, the most conservative estimate is 0.5, which maximizes variance and ensures adequate sample size.
Using the formula:
N = (Zα/2 / E)2 p(1-p)
where:
- Zα/2 ≈ 1.96 for 95% confidence
- E = 0.05 (margin of error)
- p = 0.5 (maximum variance assumption)
Calculations:
N = (1.96 / 0.05)^2 0.5 0.5 = (39.2)^2 0.25 ≈ 1536.64 0.25 ≈ 384.16
Therefore, a sample of at least 385 freshmen is needed to estimate the smoking proportion within 5% with 95% confidence.
Sample Size Calculation for Comparing Two Means (Independent Samples)
The third scenario considers a clinical trial assessing the effect of a herbal medicine on BMI in obese individuals. The objective is to detect a difference in mean BMI between the treatment and control groups with a margin of error of 2 units. Given an estimated standard deviation of 3.5, the required sample size per group can be determined.
The formula for the sample size per group in a two-sample comparison is:
N = 2 (Zα/2 + Zβ)2 σ2 / δ2
where:
- Zα/2 = 1.96 (for 95% confidence)
- Zβ = 0.84 (for 80% power, if not specified otherwise)
- σ = 3.5
- δ = 2 (desired minimum difference to detect)
Calculating:
N = 2 (1.96 + 0.84)2 3.52 / 22 = 2 (2.8)2 12.25 / 4 ≈ 2 7.84 12.25 / 4 ≈ 2 96.04 / 4 ≈ 2 24.01 ≈ 48.02
Thus, approximately 49 participants per group would be necessary, totaling 98 participants, to detect a mean BMI difference of 2 units with specified confidence and power.
Conclusion
Effective sample size calculation is integral to research design, influencing study validity and resource allocation. The three examples demonstrate the application of core statistical formulas tailored to different research contexts: estimating population means, proportions, and comparing two independent groups. Properly performed calculations ensure studies are sufficiently powered to detect true effects or estimate parameters with a desired precision, ultimately contributing to valid, reliable scientific conclusions.
References
- Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.). Routledge.
- Lwanga, S. K., & Lemeshow, S. (1991). Sample size determination in health studies: A practical manual. World Health Organization.
- Naing, L., Winn, T., & Rusli, B. N. (2006). Practical issues in calculating the sample size for prevalence studies. Archives of Orofacial Sciences, 1, 9-14.
- Naidoo, S., & Mdha, N. (2017). Sample size calculations for clinical research. Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, 11(5), JE01–JE04.
- Lachin, J. M. (2000). Statistical considerations in the design and analysis of clinical trials. Wiley.
- Fisher, R. A. (1925). Statistical Methods for Research Workers. Oliver & Boyd.
- Littell, R. C., Milliken, G. A., Stroup, W. W., & Wolfinger, R. D. (2006). SAS for Mixed Models. SAS Institute.
- Candas, N., & Hartmann, M. (2010). Sample size estimation for clinical trials with continuous and binary outcomes. Emergency Medicine Journal, 27(10), 721–724.
- Biau, D. J., Kernéis, S., & Porcher, R. (2008). Sample size calculation in clinical research: A review of guidelines for good practice. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 466, 285–291.
- Bewick, V., Cheek, L., & Ball, J. (2005). Statistics review 14: Sample size calculations. Critical Care, 9(6), 509–513.