Journal
STATISTICAL METHODS IN MEDICAL RESEARCH
Volume 25, Issue 2, Pages 538-552Publisher
SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/0962280212461098
Keywords
Clinical trial; meta-analysis; heterogeneity; publication bias; type I error
Ask authors/readers for more resources
There is debate whether clinical trials with suboptimal power are justified and whether results from large studies are more reliable than the (combined) results of smaller trials. We quantified the error rates for evaluations based on single conventionally powered trials (80% or 90% power) versus evaluations based on the random-effects meta-analysis of a series of smaller trials. When a treatment was assumed to have no effect but heterogeneity was present, the error rates for a single trial were increased more than 10-fold above the nominal rate, even for low heterogeneity. Conversely, for meta-analyses on a series of trials, the error rates were correct. When selective publication was present, the error rates were always increased, but they still tended to be lower for a series of trials than single trials. We conclude that evidence of efficacy based on a series of (smaller) trials, may lower the error rates compared with using a single well-powered trial. Only when both heterogeneity and selective publication can be excluded, a single trial is able to provide conclusive evidence.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available