Search research articles

ABOUT JoVE

Overview Leadership Blog JoVE Help Center

AUTHORS

Publishing Process Editorial Board Scope & Policies Peer Review FAQ Submit

LIBRARIANS

Testimonials Subscriptions Access Resources Library Advisory Board FAQ

RESEARCH

JoVE Journal Methods Collections JoVE Encyclopedia of Experiments Archive

EDUCATION

JoVE Core JoVE Business JoVE Science Education JoVE Lab Manual Faculty Resource Center Faculty Site

Terms & Conditions of Use

Related Concept Videos

Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors

Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors

In the case of systematic errors, the sources can be identified, and the errors can be subsequently minimized by addressing these sources. According to the source, systematic errors can be divided into sampling, instrumental, methodological, and personal errors.
Sampling errors originate from improper sampling methods or the wrong sample population. These errors can be minimized by refining the sampling strategy. Defective instruments or faulty calibrations are the sources of instrumental...

Contaminants and Errors

Contaminants and Errors

Effective sample preparation is crucial for accurate and reliable laboratory analysis. During this process, two significant sources of error can arise: concentration bias from improper sample splitting and contamination caused by methods used to reduce particle size, such as grinding or homogenization. Identifying and minimizing these potential errors is crucial to ensuring the validity of the analysis.
Another key consideration is determining the appropriate number of samples required to...

Convenience Sampling Method

Convenience Sampling Method

Sampling is a technique to select a portion (or subset) of the larger population and study that portion (the sample) to gain information about the population. Data are the result of sampling from a population. The sampling method ensures that samples are drawn without bias and accurately represent the population.
Convenience sampling is a non-random method of sample selection; this method selects individuals that are easily accessible and may result in biased data. For example, a marketing...

Sampling Plans

Sampling Plans

Sampling is a crucial step in analytical chemistry, allowing researchers to collect representative data from a large population. Common sampling methods include random, judgmental, systematic, stratified, and cluster sampling.
Random sampling is a method where each member of the population has an equal chance of being selected for the sample. It involves selecting individuals randomly, often using random number generators or lottery-type methods. For example, when analyzing the properties of a...

Sampling Methods: Overview

Sampling Methods: Overview

A sample refers to a smaller subset representative of a larger population. In analytical chemistry, studying or analyzing an entire population is often impractical or impossible. Therefore, samples are used to draw inferences and generalize the whole population. The sampling method selects individuals or items from a population to create a sample. Standard sampling methods include random, judgemental, systematic, stratified, and cluster sampling.
In analytical chemistry, the choice of sampling...

Sample Size Calculation

Sample Size Calculation

Knowledge of the sample size is the first requirement to conduct random sampling or an experiment. The sample size is the total number of units, observations, or groups (in some cases) used to get the data to estimate a population parameter. As the name suggests, the sample size is that of the sample drawn from the population and differs from the population size.
The sample size for the given experiment or sampling effort is fundamental to any study design. Sample size decides the number of...

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by

Same author

Galectin 9 Levels as a Potential Predictor of Intact HIV Reservoir Decay.

The Journal of infectious diseases·2024

Same author

Pivoting from in-person to phone survey assessment of alcohol and substance use: effects on representativeness in a United States prospective cohort of women living with and without HIV.

The American journal of drug and alcohol abuse·2023

Same author

Body Composition Changes Over the Menopausal Transition in Women With and Without Human Immunodeficiency Virus.

Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America·2023

Same author

Longitudinal Assessment of the Enhanced Liver Fibrosis Score in the Era of Contemporary HIV and Hepatitis C Virus Treatment.

The Journal of infectious diseases·2022

Same author

Antiretroviral Therapy Adherence During and Postbreastfeeding Cessation Measured by Tenofovir Levels in Hair.

Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes (1999)·2022

Same author

Distinct forms of migration and mobility are differentially associated with HIV treatment adherence.

AIDS (London, England)·2022

Same journal

The need for another tool: Australian healthcare professionals on the use of psilocybin for existential distress in people with cancer.

BMC medicine·2026

Same journal

Liquid biopsy-based multi-omics approach for early detection of hepatocellular carcinoma (ASCEND-Hep): a multiphase prospective development and validation study.

BMC medicine·2026

Same journal

Effect of endoscopic screening for non-cardia gastric cancer: a 12-year report of a population-based randomized trial.

BMC medicine·2026

Same journal

Therapeutic activation of PPARα contributes to NOTCH1 inhibition in T-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia.

BMC medicine·2026

Same journal

Social vulnerability index and inflammation: a proteomic analysis linking social context to biological risk in older black adults.

BMC medicine·2026

Same journal

Efficacy of remote ischemic conditioning on cerebral blood flow regulation in patients with endovascular stenting: a randomized controlled trial.

BMC medicine·2026

See all related articles

Search research articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jun 14, 2026

Sampling Soils in a Heterogeneous Research Plot

Sampling Soils in a Heterogeneous Research Plot

Published on: January 7, 2019

Current sample size conventions: flaws, harms, and alternatives.

Peter Bacchetti¹

¹Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California, San Francisco, CA 94143, USA. peter@biostat.ucsf.edu

|March 24, 2010

Summary

This summary is machine-generated.

The common 80% statistical power benchmark for medical research is flawed and harms the scientific process. Alternative methods for determining sample size are more rational and should be adopted.

More Related Videos

A Gaze-Contingent Display Framework for Perceptual Learning Research with Simulated Central Vision Loss

A Gaze-Contingent Display Framework for Perceptual Learning Research with Simulated Central Vision Loss

Published on: April 11, 2025

An Unbiased Approach of Sampling TEM Sections in Neuroscience

An Unbiased Approach of Sampling TEM Sections in Neuroscience

Published on: April 13, 2019

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jun 14, 2026

Sampling Soils in a Heterogeneous Research Plot

Sampling Soils in a Heterogeneous Research Plot

Published on: January 7, 2019

A Gaze-Contingent Display Framework for Perceptual Learning Research with Simulated Central Vision Loss

A Gaze-Contingent Display Framework for Perceptual Learning Research with Simulated Central Vision Loss

Published on: April 11, 2025

An Unbiased Approach of Sampling TEM Sections in Neuroscience

An Unbiased Approach of Sampling TEM Sections in Neuroscience

Published on: April 13, 2019

Area of Science:

Medical Research Methodology
Biostatistics
Research Ethics

Background:

Widespread belief that 80% statistical power is essential for scientifically sound medical research.
Peer reviewers frequently question studies with insufficient statistical power.

Purpose of the Study:

Critique the conventional 80% statistical power requirement in medical research.
Advocate for alternative approaches to sample size determination.

Main Methods:

Analysis of the limitations of standard power calculations.
Discussion of the impact of sample size on study value.
Exploration of alternative methods for sample size justification.

Main Results:

The 80% power rule is arbitrary and does not adequately define study adequacy.
Standard power calculations are unreliable and neglect crucial study outcomes like estimates and confidence intervals.
Current conventions negatively impact research integrity, innovation, and resource allocation.

Conclusions:

The 80% power convention is deeply flawed and detrimental to medical research.
Alternative methods such as value of information analysis, cost-based decisions, and sensitivity analyses offer more rational approaches.
Reforming research training and peer review practices is crucial for adopting more effective sample size determination strategies.