↓ Skip to main content

Obtaining Power or Obtaining Precision

Overview of attention for article published in Evaluation & the Health Professions, September 2003
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
q&a
2 Q&A threads

Readers on

mendeley
72 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Obtaining Power or Obtaining Precision
Published in
Evaluation & the Health Professions, September 2003
DOI 10.1177/0163278703255242
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Sample-size planning historically has been approached from a power analytic perspective in order to have some reasonable probability of correctly rejecting the null hypothesis. Another approach that is not as well-known is one that emphasizes accuracy in parameter estimation (AIPE). From the AIPE perspective, sample size is chosen such that the expected width of a confidence interval will be sufficiently narrow. The rationales of both approaches are delineated and two procedures are given for estimating the sample size from the AIPE perspective for a two-group mean comparison. One method yields the required sample size, such that the expected width of the computed confidence interval will be the value specified. A modification allows for a defined degree of probabilistic assurance that the width of the computed confidence interval will be no larger than specified. The authors emphasize that the correct conceptualization of sample-size planning depends on the research questions and particular goals of the study.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 72 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United States 4 6%
Belgium 2 3%
South Africa 1 1%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Unknown 64 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 13 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 17%
Professor 9 13%
Student > Master 4 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 4%
Other 9 13%
Unknown 22 31%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 18%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 13%
Psychology 9 13%
Social Sciences 8 11%
Mathematics 2 3%
Other 9 13%
Unknown 22 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 September 2026.
All research outputs
#6,385,405
of 34,324,933 outputs
Outputs from Evaluation & the Health Professions
#89
of 482 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,041
of 77,908 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Evaluation & the Health Professions
#2
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,324,933 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 482 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 77,908 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.