The largest database of trusted experimental protocols

Spss samplepower

Manufactured by IBM
Sourced in United States, Japan

SPSS SamplePower is a statistical software tool that enables users to perform power analysis and sample size calculations. It provides functionality to determine the appropriate sample size for various study designs and statistical tests, ensuring the reliability and statistical significance of research findings.

Automatically generated - may contain errors

22 protocols using spss samplepower

1

Preoperative Localization Procedures Comparison

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The sample size was calculated with SPSS SamplePower (IBM, Armonk, New York, NY, USA) using a two-sample t test with the hypothesized duration of the preoperative localization procedures. We estimated 27.2 min for the preoperative pathway using Magtrace and 38.1 min using Tc99. Assuming that the data were distributed normally, we calculated a sample size of 28 patients per group.
Data concerning clinical and pathologic features were statistically analyzed using SPSS version 26.0 (IBM). The patients who underwent bilateral surgery were considered as two cases for all features except age and BMI because the treatments of the affected breasts were considered sufficiently independent of each other. Thereby, the time for each injection was measured separately, and the time for undressing and redressing or for going to the nuclear medicine department and back was counted twice.
Kolmogorov–Smirnov and Shapiro–Wilk tests of normality were performed, and the values are presented as median (interquartile range, [IQR]) or as mean ± standard deviation. Depending on data distribution, the Mann–Whitney U test or the two-sample t test was applied for continuous variables. Categorical variables were compared using the Chi square-test or Fisher’s exact test. A p value lower than 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
2

Hyperbaric Exposure Effects on Biomarkers

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
A prospective sample size power calculation for PAI-1 analysis was done using IBM SPSS Sample Power (Version 3, IBM Corp., Armonk, NY). Eleven participants provided an estimated power of 80% with an α error probability of 0.05 based on plasma PAI-1 data from a general adult population (Margaglione et al. 1998 (link)).
All statistical data analyses were performed using IBM SPSS Statistics software (Version 21.0. IBM Corp.). Kolmogorov–Smirnov test and Q–Q normal probability plots verified that the biomarker measurements were normally distributed; thus parametric tests were used in further analyses. A linear mixed model was employed to assess the effect of repeated hyperbaric exposures on the level of total PAI-1 and cortisol, with time of sampling as a fixed categorical factor and diver id as a random factor. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to identify statistical differences in serum biomarker levels between the divers. The level of significance was set at  0.05.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
3

Perioperative Ketone Body Changes

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The size of the study was chosen to detect a difference in the concentration of ketone bodies. A previous study reported that the concentration of ketone bodies in volunteers who received preoperative oral carbohydrates decreased from 124 ± 118 to 22 ± 4 mmol/L before the induction of anesthesia [15 (link)]. Therefore, the required number of patients in each group was 12, with an alpha of 0.05 and a power of 80 % for ketone bodies (SPSS SamplePower, IBM Co., Armonk, NY, USA). Comparisons between groups were performed using Student’s t test or the Mann–Whitney U test. A P value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
4

Non-parametric Analysis of Paired Data

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The sample size (α = 0.05, 1-β = 0.80, n = 25) was calculated using SPSS SamplePower and statistical analysis was conducted using SPSS Statistics 22 (IBM, New York, USA). Wilcoxon signed rank test was used for paired analysis of two related non-parametric variables, where the absolute difference between each pair was ranked and the summation of mean positive and negative ranks generated as a z score. A two-sided exact p value ≤0.05 was considered statistically significant. Where appropriate, linear correlation was expressed as Pearson’s coefficient (r) and a significant score defined as an exact, two-tailed p value ≤0.05. Samples were analysed blind to their collection method.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
5

Flexibility and Arterial Stiffness Relationship

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
We determined the appropriate sample size of each group before starting the study by power calculations using SPSS Sample Power (IBM, Tokyo, Japan). To assess the relationship between flexibility and arterial stiffness, participants in each age and sex category were categorized into groups with high- or poor-flexibility based on the median value of the sit-and-reach test. In accordance with previous findings [5] (link), we assumed that the mean difference of arterial stiffness between the two groups would be 7.5% (approximately distributed between 5% and 10%). To detect this difference with 80% power and with a two-tailed α of 5%, each group should comprise 78 (>63) participants. To allow for possible correspondence with exclusion criteria and for comparisons with previous results, we planned to recruit about 100 participants per group (100 participants×2 groups×6 categories of age and sex = 1200). Thus, the present study included data from 1297 surveyed participants.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
6

Intrathecal Antagonist Study Power Analysis

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Target group sizes (11 for behavioral studies and 8 for mRNA and immunohistochemistry studies) were determined prior to experimentation using power analyses on preliminary data to observe a 20% effect size in the primary outcome measures (α=0.05, [1-β] =0.8, IBM SPSS Sample Power) (IBM, Armonk, NY, USA). For the intrathecal antagonist studies, we accounted for up to a 25% exclusion rate for pSNL animals due to lack of recovery to 13 g within 5-9 weeks after surgery and received approval to prepare up to 14 animals per group to accommodate these potential exclusions.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
7

Femoral Head Fragment Migration Analysis

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
All calculations were performed using IBM SPSS Statistics (version
20; SPSS Inc., Chicago, Illinois) and IBM SPSS Sample Power (version
3; IBM Corp., Armonk, New York). Normality of data was assessed
by the Shapiro–Wilk test, and parametric and non-parametric statistics
were performed accordingly. Level of significance was set to 0.05
for all tests. Levene’s test, based on mean or ranks,13 tested equality
of variance. Pearson’s correlation coefficients14 of femoral head
fragment migrations within pairs were calculated. A related samples t-test
tested the null hypothesis that construct stability using implant
A and implant B was equal. Obtained data from these calculations
were then used in a hypothetical power analysis to explore the effect
of different grouping on required sample size when considering 2
mm difference in femoral head fragment migration to be of potential
clinical relevance.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
8

Arterial Stiffness Reduction Protocol

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
We determined the appropriate sample size for each group before starting the study by power calculations using SPSS Sample Power (IBM, Tokyo, Japan) and assumed that the maximal reduction in arterial stiffness after intervention would be 4–7 % according to the previous results (Nishiwaki et al. 2014b (link); Yamamoto et al. 2009 (link)). To detect this difference at 80 % power and with a two-tailed α of 5 %, the intervention group should comprise eight participants. Thus, we recruited 16 participants and assigned them to control and intervention groups (n = 8 per group).
Both groups were assessed before and after the experimental period. All tests and interventions proceeded in a quiet air-conditioned room (22–24 °C) at the same time of day and at the same number of hours after the last meal to avoid potential diurnal variations. The participants were required to abstain from caffeine and fast for ≥4 h before each test and then were assessed at least 24 h after the most recent stretching session to avoid any acute effects.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
9

VO2max Measurement and Analysis Protocol

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Samples size was estimated for VO2max as primary outcome measure using IBM SPSS SamplePower. The principal outcome variable VO2max were analysed between groups using a linear model with correction for baseline value (ANCOVA) [18] (link), and within groups comparisons were done using paired samples T-test. Values are expressed as mean and standard deviation (SD). A two-tailed significance-level of p<0.05 was acknowledged as statistical significant. All analyses were done by PASW 17.0 (SPSS Inc, Chicago). At five occasions a subject was unavailable for testing. Because of the Gaussian behaviour of the data and the low number of missing values, these time points were estimated by an imputed value using Missing Value Analysis (PASW 17.0) to complete the dataset [19] (link).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
10

Comparison of POGO Scores in Two Groups

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Sample size was calculated to detect a difference of >20% of the POGO score among the two groups to achieve a power of 80% using SPSS Sample Power (IBM Corp, Armonk, NY, USA), a minimum of 25 patients were required for each group. Accordingly, 32 patients were enrolled in each group to compensate for missing data or dropout.
Statistical analysis of this study was conducted using SPSS version 17 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA). Continuous data were represented in the form of mean and standard deviation or median and range. Categorical data were presented in the form of number and percentage. Data were checked for normality using Shapiro–Wilk test. We compared the mean between the two groups by using unpaired Student's t-test. We compared the median between the two groups using Mann–Whitney U-test. Categorical data were compared between the two groups using Chi-square test. P value <0.05 was considered statistically significant.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand

About PubCompare

Our mission is to provide scientists with the largest repository of trustworthy protocols and intelligent analytical tools, thereby offering them extensive information to design robust protocols aimed at minimizing the risk of failures.

We believe that the most crucial aspect is to grant scientists access to a wide range of reliable sources and new useful tools that surpass human capabilities.

However, we trust in allowing scientists to determine how to construct their own protocols based on this information, as they are the experts in their field.

Ready to get started?

Sign up for free.
Registration takes 20 seconds.
Available from any computer
No download required

Sign up now

Revolutionizing how scientists
search and build protocols!