Abstract:In recent years, there has been a strong drive to improve the inclusion of animals of both sexes in the design of in vivo research studies, driven by a need to increase sex representation in fundamental biology and drug development. This has resulted in inclusion mandates by funding bodies and journals, alongside numerous published manuscripts highlighting the issue and providing guidance to scientists. However, progress is slow and barriers to the routine use of both sexes remain. A frequent, major concern is the perceived need for a higher overall sample size to achieve an equivalent level of statistical power, which would result in an increased ethical and resource burden. This perception arises from either the belief that sex inclusion will increase variability in the data (either through a baseline difference or a treatment effect that depends on sex), thus reducing the sensitivity of statistical tests, or from misapprehensions about the correct way to analyse the data, including disaggregation or pooling by sex. Here, we conduct an in-depth examination of the consequences of including both sexes on statistical power. We performed simulations by constructing artificial datasets that encompass a range of outcomes that may occur in studies studying a treatment effect in the context of both sexes. This includes both baseline sex differences and situations in which the size of the treatment effect depends on sex in both the same and opposite directions. The data were then analysed using either a factorial analysis approach, which is appropriate for the design, or a t test approach following pooling or disaggregation of the data, which are common but erroneous strategies. The results demonstrate that there is no loss of power to detect treatment effects when splitting the sample size across sexes in most scenarios, providing that the data are analysed using an appropriate factorial analysis method (e.g., two-way ANOVA). In the rare situations where power is lost, the benefit of understanding the role of sex outweighs the power considerations. Additionally, use of the inappropriate analysis pipelines results in a loss of statistical power. Therefore, we recommend analysing data collected from both sexes using factorial analysis and splitting the sample size across male and female mice as a standard strategy.

Finding the right power balance: Better study design and collaboration can reduce dependence on statistical power

Inferential statistics, power estimates, and study design formalities continue to suppress biomedical innovation

Power failure: why small sample size undermines the reliability of neuroscience

Power to Detect What? Considerations for Planning and Evaluating Sample Size

Summary-statistics-based power analysis: A new and practical method to determine sample size for mixed-effects modeling.

Focus on Data: Statistical Design of Experiments and Sample Size Selection Using Power Analysis

scPower accelerates and optimizes the design of multi-sample single cell transcriptomic studies

Enhancing Statistical Power While Maintaining Small Sample Sizes in Behavioral Neuroscience Experiments Evaluating Success Rates

Addressing the “Replication Crisis”: Using Original Studies to Design Replication Studies with Appropriate Statistical Power

Power Analysis Software for Educational Researchers

Addressing Common Misuses and Pitfalls of P values in Biomedical Research

Statistical simulations show that scientists need not increase overall sample size by default when including both sexes in in vivo studies

Robust Point and Variance Estimation for Meta‐analyses with Selective Reporting and Dependent Effect Sizes

Effect size, sample size and power of forced swim test assays in mice: Guidelines for investigators to optimize reproducibility

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

Addressing researcher degrees of freedom through minP adjustment

The power and pitfalls of underpowered studies

Conducting power analysis for meta‐analysis with dependent effect sizes: Common guidelines and an introduction to the POMADE R package

Powering population health research: Considerations for plausible and actionable effect sizes

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

The Power of Microbiome Studies: Some Considerations on Which Alpha and Beta Metrics to Use and How to Report Results