Abstract

Randomized controlled trials, the “gold standard” of evidence-based medicine, derive their strength from strict adherence to methods such as randomization and blinding, which minimize bias and external influences on study data. Even with rigorous methodology, the risk of random error caused by intrinsic data variations remains, but it can be mitigated by increasing sample size.1 In the midst of a nascent pandemic, adequate sample size and other commonly accepted standards of medical research have been set aside for various reasons, including that of single-center attempts at studies that require more subjects than they can recruit on their own. In this article we explore the implications of clinical studies that proceed with small sample sizes during disease outbreaks.
Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1338-1340
Number of pages3
JournalCHEST
Volume158
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 2020

Keywords

  • pandemic
  • Clinical studies
  • covid-19
  • MCRD
  • coronavirus disease 2019
  • minimal clinically relevant difference

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine
  • Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine
  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Impact of Small-N Studies During a Pandemic'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this