Journal Article

Ethics and Sample Size

Peter Bacchetti, Leslie E. Wolf, Mark R. Segal and Charles E. McCulloch

in American Journal of Epidemiology

Published on behalf of Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health

Volume 161, issue 2, pages 105-110
Published in print January 2005 | ISSN: 0002-9262
Published online January 2005 | e-ISSN: 1476-6256 | DOI:
Ethics and Sample Size

More Like This

Show all results sharing this subject:

  • Public Health and Epidemiology


Show Summary Details


The belief is widespread that studies are unethical if their sample size is not large enough to ensure adequate power. The authors examine how sample size influences the balance that determines the ethical acceptability of a study: the balance between the burdens that participants accept and the clinical or scientific value that a study can be expected to produce. The average projected burden per participant remains constant as the sample size increases, but the projected study value does not increase as rapidly as the sample size if it is assumed to be proportional to power or inversely proportional to confidence interval width. This implies that the value per participant declines as the sample size increases and that smaller studies therefore have more favorable ratios of projected value to participant burden. The ethical treatment of study participants therefore does not require consideration of whether study power is less than the conventional goal of 80% or 90%. Lower power does not make a study unethical. The analysis addresses only ethical acceptability, not optimality; large studies may be desirable for other than ethical reasons.

Keywords: ethics committees; ethics, research; sample size

Journal Article.  3891 words.  Illustrated.

Subjects: Public Health and Epidemiology

Full text: subscription required

How to subscribe Recommend to my Librarian

Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content. Please, subscribe or login to access all content.