This Article Full Text (OnlineFirst PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Allison, D. B. Articles by Foster, G. D. PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Allison, D. B. Articles by Foster, G. D. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Sample Size in Obesity Trials: Patient Perspective versus Current Practice

^* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: melobeid{at}uab.edu.

	Abstract

Objective. To evaluate patient opinions on acceptable risks in exchange for a given degree of weight loss and their implications for sample size determination in obesity randomized clinical trials (RCTs). Design. Survey of patients entering RCTs for weight loss in a university-based clinical research setting and power calculations based on their responses. Participants. Men (n = 8) and women (n = 66) between 24 and 73 years of age with body mass indices ranging from 26.8 to 40.5 kg/m². Measurements. Survey responses to questions assessing the added risk of serious adverse events (SAEs) or death one is willing to assume for a given degree of weight loss. Results. For 5% and 10% weight loss against risk for death per se, the mean acceptable risk tended to be about 3.5%, but the median (0.00) and mode (0.00) suggested that for most individuals, only a risk of 1% would be acceptable. Figures, estimated dropout rates, and base rates of SAEs (including deaths) from recent obesity trials indicate that 1-year 2-group obesity RCTs would need tens of thousands of participants per group to have 80% power to detect risks that are meaningful to patients at the 2-tailed 0.05 a level. Conclusion. Patient education is needed to explain which risks are realistically detectable in RCTs so that patients may provide truly informed consent, or RCT standards should be modified to meet patients’ implicit expectations.

First published on August 12, 2009
Medical Decision Making 2009, doi:10.1177/0272989X09340583


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?