PubMed HealthSearch

PubMed · 8745129

Sample size determination in epidemiologic studies.

Abstract

Sample size determination is an important issue in epidemiologic studies. Standard methods for determining sample size in cohort and case-control studies have generally been restricted to dichotomous disease and exposure variables and discrete confounding variables, and are based on simplifying assumptions that could often be unrealistic. Methods for sample size determination that make less restrictive and more realistic assumptions regarding the distribution of disease, exposure and confounding variables and which more closely parallel the analyses that are performed on the data, after the study has been conducted, have been developed in recent years. In this article some recent developments in the methodology for sample size determination in epidemiologic studies are reviewed.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

P J Wickramaratne. 1995. Sample size determination in epidemiologic studies.. https://doi.org/10.1177/096228029500400404

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Occupational lung cancer risk for men in Germany: results from a pooled case-control study.

Occupational exposures such as crystalline silica, diesel engine exhaust, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, and man-made mineral fibers are strongly suspected to increase lung cancer risk. Two case-control studies in Germany conducted between 1988 and 1996 were pooled for a joint analysis. A total of 3,498 male cases and 3,541 male population controls, frequency matched for age and region, were included in the study. The lifelong history of all jobs and industries was coded and occupational exposures were evaluated by expert rating. Odds ratios, crude and adjusted for smoking and asbestos exposure, were calculated by conditional logistic regression. Job-related evaluation showed a statistically significant increased odds ratio adjusted for smoking among farmers; forestry workers, fishermen, and livestock workers; miners and quarrymen; chemical processors; cabinet makers and related wood workers; metal producers and processors; bricklayers and carpenters; road construction workers, pipelayers and well diggers; plasterers, insulators, and upholsterers; painters and lacquerers; stationary engine and heavy equipment operators; transport workers and freight handlers; and service workers. With regard to specific occupational exposures, elevated odds ratios (OR) (95% confidence intervals (CI)) for lung cancer risk adjusted for smoking and asbestos exposure were observed for man-made mineral fibers (OR = 1.48, 95% CI 1.17, 1.88); crystalline silica (OR = 1.41, 95% CI 1.22, 1.62); diesel engine exhaust (OR = 1.43, 95% CI 1.23, 1.67); and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (OR = 1.53, 95% CI 1.14, 2.04). The risk of asbestos exposure, adjusted for smoking was also increased (OR = 1.41, 95% CI 1.24, 1.60).

Case-Control Studies