Sample Size. As this is an extension study, no formal sample size analysis was performed for this study. Study data will be tabulated and summarized.
Sample Size. For each of the locations, the sample size was determined at 5% level of precision (also called desired margin of error), 95% confidence level and 50% population proportion of response to key study indicators. The choice of population response proportion is arbitrary; but this is what is assumed to generate the largest possible sample in the absence of a prior knowledge about population response to key study indicators. The sample size was not adjusted for non- response factor. Like in many surveys, non-response of the sampling unit (here household) has been tackled by substituting original sample unit by another.
Sample Size. The sample size depended upon when theoretical saturation is reached and was estimated to range from 20 to 30 participants for service providers group and 20 to 30 for ‘people with mental illness and their primary caregivers’ group’ This included both men and women. Where possible, equal numbers of men and women were recruited with participants representing all adult age ranges (age 18 years and above). A total of 32 in-depth interviews were conducted: 10 with people with mental illness, 6 with caregivers and 16 with service providers. We conducted one focus group discussion (FGD) with service users and their caregivers. There were sixteen participants in the FGD. The participants in the FGD included six service users and ten caregivers.
Sample Size. 10.5.1 The number of passengers interviewed during each Fare Evasion Survey will be sufficient to ensure that the overall Fare Evasion Rate for bus services, calculated from each Fare Evasion Survey, shall have an overall sample error of less than 1%.
Sample Size. The primary outcome for the interrater agreement analysis was the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) of the AHI. Given nine sleep scorers (one at each site), the 15 PSGs had a power of 83% to detect an ICC of at least 0.90, assuming a null hypothesis of ICC = 0.70. Statistical Analysis The interrater reliability measures used to examine the agreement among the nine different scorers were the ICC for continuous variables (respiratory indices, duration of sleep stages, and arousal index) and the kappa (κ) statistic for mul- tiple raters for the categorical variables (sleep stages). The levels of agreement using the ICCs of respiratory indices, dura- tion of sleep stages, and arousal index were classified as fol- lows: 0.00-0.25 = little, 0.26-0.49 = low, 0.50-0.69 = moderate, Table 1—Interscorer reliability of respiratory events Sleep Center (mean) AHI (events/h) 25.8 ± 19.4 22.7 ± 18.4 25.7 ± 19.0 25.9 ± 19.8 24.3 ± 17.2 22.7 ± 17.4 23.0 ± 15.4 25.9 ± 21.3 23.6 ± 18.1 0.95 0.91-0.98 Total Apneas 54.1 ± 71.9 31.6 ± 68.2 45.3 ± 66.5 46.3 ± 63.9 42.3 ± 60.3 20.3 ± 41.8 58.1 ± 78.3 104.6 ± 127.7 51.1 ± 72.4 0.73 0.55-0.88 Obstructive 44.1 ± 61.3 28.7 ± 68.2 39.5 ± 67.1 35.9 ± 55.2 37.5 ± 57.1 17.7 ± 36.7 56.4 ± 76.6 100.7 ± 127.7 42.2 ± 68.9 0.70 0.51-0.86 Central 6.7 ± 9.1 2.9 ± 7.1 4.4 ± 7.8 7.3 ± 10.2 1.0 ± 2.0 0.9 ± 1.4 0.9 ± 1.9 3.3 ± 6.2 6.7 ± 7.8 0.46 0.27-0.70 Mixed 3.3 ± 9.5 0.1 ± 0.3 1.5 ± 3.0 3.1 ± 7.5 4.0 ± 7.5 1.7 ± 5.4 0.8 ± 2.3 0.6 ± 1.2 2.2 ± 5.6 0.42 0.24-0.67 Hypopneas 90.1 ± 76.6 100.7 ± 85.7 109.1 ± 85.4 94.8 ± 73.8 108.2 ± 79.4 109.2 ± 87.4 81.1 ± 58.1 51.0 ± 36.9 86.5 ± 75.1 0.80 0.65-0.91 ODI (events/h) 22.4 ± 17.6 22.0 ± 17.5 24.6 ± 18.3 21.6 ± 17.0 25.3 ± 17.5 22.4 ± 18.0 19.7 ± 14.2 22.9 ± 17.4 20.9 ± 16.6 0.97 0.93-0.99 AHI, apnea-hypopnea index; CI, confidence interval; ICC, intraclass correlation coefficient; ODI, oxygen desaturation index. Table 2—Kappa (κ) statistics evaluating epoch-by epoch sleep staging (NREM combined) W NREM REM All stages κ 0.78 0.77 0.78 0.78 95% CI 0.77-0.79 0.76-0.78 0.77-0.79 0.77-0.78 CI, confidence interval; NREM, nonrapid eye movement; REM, rapid eye movement. Number of epochs Table 3—Kappa (κ) statistics evaluating epoch-by-epoch staging (NREM separated) W N1 N2 N3 R All stages κ 0.78 0.31 0.60 0.67 0.78 0.63 95% CI 0.77-0.79 0.30-0.32 0.59-0.61 0.65-0.69 0.77-0.79 0.62-0.63 CI, confidence interval; NREM, nonrapid eye movement. Number of epochs 12,712 0.70-0.89 = strong, 0.90-1.00 = very strong....
Sample Size. To select the sample I will consider 40 students of the 7th Grade of Basic General Education, equivalent to 5.62% of the students of the total population in study (711), 1 teacher of the area that is 50% of the total English teachers.
Sample Size. The minimal clinically significant difference in HbA1c between the D6 and standard care groups at 18 months after randomisation was 10.9 mmol/mol (standardised effect size of d = 0.55). The sample size calculation was 432 participants. This reflected a level of statistical power of 80%, significance level of 5%, an average cluster size of 15 patients per general practice, an ICC of 0.05, an assumed participant attrition of 20%, and a loss of two practices per arm over the course of the trial. Three hundred and thirty-four patients were recruited in 24 clusters, of which 231 patients had at least one follow-up. The average cluster size was therefore 10 patients per cluster, smaller than the assumed size of 15 patients per cluster, providing a post hoc power of 77%.
Sample Size. Shutters of decorative and non-decorative type from each manufacturer, irrespective, of their thickness, shall be grouped separately and each group shall constitute a lot. The number of shutters (sample size) to be selected at random from each lot for testing shall be as specified in following Table. If the total number of shutters of each type in a work (and not the lot) is less than twenty five, testing may be done at the discretion of the Engineer-in-Charge and in such cases extra payment shall be made for the sample shutter provided the sample does not fail in any of the test specified in CPWD Specification Manual. For knife test, glue adhesive test, slamming test, the end immersion test, the number of shutters shall be as per col. 4 of following Table. TABLE 13 Sample Size and Criteria for Conformity Lot Size Sample Size Permissible no. of defective Sub. Sample size (1) (2) (3) (4) Upto 26 to 50 8 0 1 51 - 100 13 1 2 101 - 150 20 1 2 151 - 300 32 1 3 301 - 500 50 2 4 501 and above 80 2 5
Sample Size. The original design of the study included 36 In-Depth Interviews (IDIs), However, a total of 44 interviews were conducted as new themes continued to emerge during data collection, and code saturation (Hennink, 2017) had not yet been reached. IDIs were divided equally between women and men, with participants and their husbands in the intervention arm accounting for 24 of the 44 total interviews. A total of twelve FGDs were conducted, divided equally between women and men in intervention and control arms of the study. The number of FGDs was based on recommendations to conduct at least two focus groups per stratum to identify meaning saturation (Hennink, 2019), with the strata in this study being gender and study arm. Details on the sampling structure are given in Table 1 below.
