» Articles » PMID: 29403314

Guidance for Using Pilot Studies to Inform the Design of Intervention Trials with Continuous Outcomes

Overview
Journal Clin Epidemiol
Publisher Dove Medical Press
Specialty Public Health
Date 2018 Feb 7
PMID 29403314
Citations 85
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: A pilot study can be an important step in the assessment of an intervention by providing information to design the future definitive trial. Pilot studies can be used to estimate the recruitment and retention rates and population variance and to provide preliminary evidence of efficacy potential. However, estimation is poor because pilot studies are small, so sensitivity analyses for the main trial's sample size calculations should be undertaken.

Methods: We demonstrate how to carry out easy-to-perform sensitivity analysis for designing trials based on pilot data using an example. Furthermore, we introduce rules of thumb for the size of the pilot study so that the overall sample size, for both pilot and main trials, is minimized.

Results: The example illustrates how sample size estimates for the main trial can alter dramatically by plausibly varying assumptions. Required sample size for 90% power varied from 392 to 692 depending on assumptions. Some scenarios were not feasible based on the pilot study recruitment and retention rates.

Conclusion: Pilot studies can be used to help design the main trial, but caution should be exercised. We recommend the use of sensitivity analyses to assess the robustness of the design assumptions for a main trial.

Citing Articles

Developing evaluation metrics to measure the US national institute of health plans to enhance diverse perspectives: a protocol for a consensus-based study.

Levites Strekalova Y, Jain S, Sarder P BMJ Open. 2025; 15(2):e087739.

PMID: 40010840 PMC: 11865751. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-087739.


Efficacy, Feasibility, and Acceptability of an Emotional Competence Tele-Intervention for Mandarin-Speaking Children Aged 5 to 7 Years With Developmental Language Disorder: Pilot Study With an Interrupted Time-Series Design.

Lu H, Liang S, Huang Y JMIR Pediatr Parent. 2025; 8:e60333.

PMID: 39933173 PMC: 11862772. DOI: 10.2196/60333.


Increasing digital equity to promote online smoking cessation program engagement among rural adults: a randomized controlled pilot trial.

Kelpin S, Brockman T, Decker P, Young A, Boehmer K, Nguyen A Commun Med (Lond). 2024; 4(1):194.

PMID: 39375517 PMC: 11458838. DOI: 10.1038/s43856-024-00624-6.


Use of pressure muscle index to guide pressure support ventilation setting: a study protocol and statistical plan for a prospective randomised controlled proof-of-concept trial.

Gao R, Yang Y, Zhang L, Miao M, Zhou J BMJ Open. 2024; 14(8):e082395.

PMID: 39097307 PMC: 11298740. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-082395.


The exploration of perioperative hypotension subtypes: a prospective, single cohort, observational pilot study.

Zhao X, Zhang Y, Kou M, Wang Z, He Q, Wen Z Front Med (Lausanne). 2024; 11:1358067.

PMID: 38952866 PMC: 11215119. DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2024.1358067.


References
1.
Hampson L, Williamson P, Wilby M, Jaki T . A framework for prospectively defining progression rules for internal pilot studies monitoring recruitment. Stat Methods Med Res. 2017; 27(12):3612-3627. DOI: 10.1177/0962280217708906. View

2.
Thabane L, Ma J, Chu R, Cheng J, Ismaila A, Rios L . A tutorial on pilot studies: the what, why and how. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2010; 10:1. PMC: 2824145. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2288-10-1. View

3.
Avery K, Williamson P, Gamble C, OConnell Francischetto E, Metcalfe C, Davidson P . Informing efficient randomised controlled trials: exploration of challenges in developing progression criteria for internal pilot studies. BMJ Open. 2017; 7(2):e013537. PMC: 5318608. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-013537. View

4.
Lancaster G, Campbell M, Eldridge S, Farrin A, Marchant M, Muller S . Trials in primary care: statistical issues in the design, conduct and evaluation of complex interventions. Stat Methods Med Res. 2010; 19(4):349-77. DOI: 10.1177/0962280209359883. View

5.
King M . A point of minimal important difference (MID): a critique of terminology and methods. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2011; 11(2):171-84. DOI: 10.1586/erp.11.9. View