Abstract:Background: When designing studies that have a continuous outcome as the primary endpoint, the hypothesized effect size ([Formula: see text]), that is, the hypothesized difference in means ([Formula: see text]) relative to the assumed variability of the endpoint ([Formula: see text]), plays an important role in sample size and power calculations. Point estimates for [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text] are often calculated using historical data. However, the uncertainty in these estimates is rarely addressed. Methods: This article presents a hybrid classical and Bayesian procedure that formally integrates prior information on the distributions of [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text] into the study’s power calculation. Conditional expected power, which averages the traditional power curve using the prior distributions of [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text] as the averaging weight, is used, and the value of [Formula: see text] is found that equates the prespecified frequentist power ([Formula: see text]) and the conditional expected power of the trial. This hypothesized effect size is then used in traditional sample size calculations when determining sample size for the study. Results: The value of [Formula: see text] found using this method may be expressed as a function of the prior means of [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text], [Formula: see text], and their prior standard deviations, [Formula: see text]. We show that the “naïve” estimate of the effect size, that is, the ratio of prior means, should be down-weighted to account for the variability in the parameters. An example is presented for designing a placebo-controlled clinical trial testing the antidepressant effect of alprazolam as monotherapy for major depression. Conclusion: Through this method, we are able to formally integrate prior information on the uncertainty and variability of both the treatment effect and the common standard deviation into the design of the study while maintaining a frequentist framework for the final analysis. Solving for the effect size which the study has a high probability of correctly detecting based on the available prior information on the difference [Formula: see text] and the standard deviation [Formula: see text] provides a valuable, substantiated estimate that can form the basis for discussion about the study’s feasibility during the design phase.

Design and analysis of factorial clinical trials: The impact of one treatment's effectiveness on the statistical power and required sample size of the other

Uncertainty directed factorial clinical trials

BASIC: A Bayesian Adaptive Synthetic-Control Design for Phase II Clinical Trials.

Design of randomized clinical trials with a binary endpoint: Conditional versus unconditional analyses of a two‐by‐two table

Using Power Analysis to Choose the Unit of Randomization, Outcome, and Approach for Subgroup Analysis for a Multilevel Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial to Reduce Disparities in Cardiovascular Health

The optimal pre-post allocation for randomized clinical trials

Power/sample size calculations for assessing correlates of risk in clinical efficacy trials

Sample size calculation in hierarchical 2×2 factorial trials with unequal cluster sizes

Selection of the effect size for sample size determination for a continuous response in a superiority clinical trial using a hybrid classical and Bayesian procedure

How to design efficient cluster randomised trials

Leveraging historical data to optimize the number of covariates and their explained variance in the analysis of randomized clinical trials.

Adaptive selection of the optimal strategy to improve precision and power in randomized trials

Clinical trial design and treatment effects: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled and single-arm trials supporting 437 FDA approvals of cancer drugs and indications

Identification of Single-Treatment Effects in Factorial Experiments

Sample Size Calculation: Inaccurate A Priori Assumptions for Nuisance Parameters Can Greatly Affect the Power of a Randomized Controlled Trial

Adapting power calculations to include a superiority margin: what are the implications?

Conditional Power and Friends: The Why and How of (Un)planned, Unblinded Sample Size Recalculations in Confirmatory Trials

Simplification or simulation: Power calculation in clinical trials

Influence of Center Effects and Imbalanced Sample Sizes Between Centers on Therapeutic Evaluation in Clinical Trials

Scaling and interpreting treatment effects in clinical trials using restricted mean survival time

The symbolic two-step method applied to cancer care delivery research: Safeguarding against designing an underpowered cluster randomized trial with a continuous outcome by accounting for the imprecision in the within- and between-center variation