IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/evarev/v20y1996i3p244-274.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Batch Sampling To Improve Power in a Community Trial

Author

Listed:
  • Henry A. Feldman

    (New England Research Institutes / Pawtucket Heart Health Program)

  • Sonja M. McKinlay

    (New England Research Institutes / Pawtucket Heart Health Program)

  • Minoo Niknian

    (Parke-Davis Pharmaceutical Research / Pawtucket Heart Health Program)

Abstract

Experiments involving large social units, such as schools, work sites, or whole cities, are commonly limited in statistical power because the number of randomized units is small, leaving few degrees of freedom for residual (between-unit) error. The authors describe a method for increasing residual degrees of freedom in a community experiment without substantially increasing cost or difficulty. In brief, they propose that the experimental units should be divided into random subsamples (batches). Batch sampling can improve statistical power if the community endpoint means are stable over time or if their temporal variation is comparable in period to the batch-sampling schedule. The authors demonstrate the theoretical advantages of the batch system and illustrate its use with data from the Pawtucket Heart Health Program, in which such a design was implemented .

Suggested Citation

  • Henry A. Feldman & Sonja M. McKinlay & Minoo Niknian, 1996. "Batch Sampling To Improve Power in a Community Trial," Evaluation Review, , vol. 20(3), pages 244-274, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:evarev:v:20:y:1996:i:3:p:244-274
    DOI: 10.1177/0193841X9602000302
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0193841X9602000302
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0193841X9602000302?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Levin, B., 1995. "Annotation: accounting for the effects of both group- and individual-level variables in community-level studies," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 85(2), pages 163-164.
    2. Simpson, J.M. & Klar, N. & Donner, A., 1995. "Accounting for cluster randomization: A review of primary prevention trials, 1990 through 1993," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 85(10), pages 1378-1383.
    3. Biener, L. & Abrams, D.B. & Follick, M.J. & Dean, L., 1989. "A comparative evaluation of a restrictive smoking policy in a general hospital," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 79(2), pages 192-195.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jonathan L. Blitstein & Peter J. Hannan & David M. Murray & William R. Shadish, 2005. "Increasing the Degrees of Freedom in Existing Group Randomized Trials," Evaluation Review, , vol. 29(3), pages 241-267, June.
    2. Beomsoo Kim, 2009. "The Impact of the Workplace Smoking Ban in Korea," Discussion Paper Series 0908, Institute of Economic Research, Korea University.
    3. Sherri P. Varnell & David M. Murray & William L. Baker, 2001. "An Evaluation of Analysis Options for the One-Group-Per-Condition Design," Evaluation Review, , vol. 25(4), pages 440-453, August.
    4. Ahn, Chul & Hu, Fan & Skinner, Celette Sugg, 2009. "Effect of imbalance and intracluster correlation coefficient in cluster randomized trials with binary outcomes," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 53(3), pages 596-602, January.
    5. Matthew C. Farrelly & William N. Evans & Edward Montgomery, 1999. "Do Workplace Smoking Bans Reduce Smoking?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(4), pages 728-747, September.
    6. S. Mukhopadhyay & S. W. Looney, 2009. "Quantile dispersion graphs to compare the efficiencies of cluster randomized designs," Journal of Applied Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(11), pages 1293-1305.
    7. Jeannette Rüge & Anja Broda & Sabina Ulbricht & Gudrun Klein & Hans-Jürgen Rumpf & Ulrich John & Christian Meyer, 2010. "Workplace smoking restrictions: smoking behavior and the intention to change among continuing smokers," International Journal of Public Health, Springer;Swiss School of Public Health (SSPH+), vol. 55(6), pages 599-608, December.
    8. Paul J. Gruenewald, 1997. "Analysis Approaches To Community Evaluation," Evaluation Review, , vol. 21(2), pages 209-230, April.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:evarev:v:20:y:1996:i:3:p:244-274. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.