Clara M Bögerl, Frederik B Laun, Armin M Nagel, Sebastian Bickelhaupt, Michael Uder, Jannis Hanspach
Abstract
Choosing the sample size in clinical MRI studies is a common, important, and challenging task, complicated by the substantial variation in potential study parameters. However, considering previously used sample sizes may provide a reference point for future studies.
Introduction
Van Beek et al. once said there is little doubt that magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is one of the most powerful diagnostic tools in contemporary clinical medicine [1]. However, in the age of evidence-based medicine [2], the MRI research community must provide the necessary evidence to support this notion.
Materials and methods
All research articles published in JMRI in the four consecutive years between 2020 and 2023 were collected and investigated (Fig 1). Of the 1,046 published research articles, only MR imaging studies that included patients were included for analysis.
Results
Of the 1048 published studies, 734 were included for analysis, and 314 were excluded based on the criteria described in Fig 1. S1 Table provides the collected data, together with a Excel-based tool to extract specific parts of the data (e.g., sample sizes of breast DWI).
Discussion
In this work, we assessed sample sizes and various study parameters in prospective and retrospective studies published in JMRI between 2020 and 2023.
Although the frequency of the sample size varied among the different categories (e.g., field strength and content category), each study represented an individual case and depended on study type, effect size, prevalence of the disease under investigation, and other parameters such as available scan time.
Conclusion
There is wide variation in the sample sizes in the studies published by JMRI between 2020 and 2023, depending on study type, content category, and evaluation method. In clinical MRI studies, balancing statistical power and minimizing patient involvement is crucial and necessitates carefully choosing the sample size.
Citation: Bögerl CM, Laun FB, Nagel AM, Bickelhaupt S, Uder M, Hanspach J (2025) Analysis of the sample size used in clinical MRI studies. PLoS ONE 20(3): e0316611. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0316611
Editor: Yuki Arita,, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Received: October 3, 2024; Accepted: December 13, 2024; Published: March 3, 2025
Copyright: © 2025 Bögerl et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Data Availability: All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.
Funding: F.B.L., A.M.N., S.B. and J.H. are involved in the DFG-funded research unit 5534 (project 500888779, https://www.dfg.de) and gratefully acknowledge the financial support. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interest exists.
