Low statistical power in biomedical science:a review of three human research domains

Studies with low statistical power increase the likelihood that a statistically significant finding represents a false positive result. We conducted a review of meta-analyses of studies investigating the association of biological, environmental or cognitive parameters with neurological, psychiatric and somatic diseases, excluding treatment studies, in order to estimate the average statistical power across these domains. Taking the effect size indicated by a meta-analysis as the best estimate of the likely true effect size, and assuming a threshold for declaring statistical significance of 5%, we found that approximately 50% of studies have statistical power in the 0–10% or 11–20% range, well below the minimum of 80% that is often considered conventional. Studies with low statistical power appear to be common in the biomedical sciences, at least in the specific subject areas captured by our search strategy. However, we also observe evidence that this depends in part on research methodology, with candidate gene studies showing very low average power and studies using cognitive/behavioural measures showing high average power. This warrants further investigation

Inhibitory control of positive and negative information and adolescent depressive symptoms:a population-based cohort study

BACKGROUND: Large population-based cohort studies of neuropsychological factors that characterise or precede depressive symptoms are rare. Most studies use small case-control or cross-sectional designs, which may cause selection bias and cannot test temporality. In a large UK population-based cohort, we investigated cross-sectional and longitudinal associations between inhibitory control of positive and negative information and adolescent depressive symptoms. METHODS: Cohort study of 2328 UK adolescents who completed an affective go/no-go task at age 18. Depressive symptoms were assessed with the Clinical Interview Schedule Revised (CIS-R) and short Mood and Feeling Questionnaire (sMFQ) at age 18, and with the sMFQ 1 year later (age 19). Analyses were multilevel and traditional linear regressions, before and after adjusting for confounders. RESULTS: Cross-sectionally, we found little evidence that adolescents with more depressive symptoms made more inhibitory control errors [after adjustments, errors increased by 0.04% per 1 s.d. increase in sMFQ score (95% confidence interval 0.02-0.06)], but this association was not observed for the CIS-R. There was no evidence for an influence of valence. Longitudinally, there was no evidence that reduced inhibitory control was associated with future depressive symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Inhibitory control of positive and negative information does not appear to be a marker of current or future depressive symptoms in adolescents and would not be a useful target in interventions to prevent adolescent depression. Our lack of convincing evidence for associations with depressive symptoms suggests that the affective go/no-go task is not a promising candidate for future neuroimaging studies of adolescent depression

Possible Association of APOE Genotype with Working Memory in Young Adults

Possession of the ε4 allele of the Apolipoprotein E (APOE) gene is associated with an increased risk of Alzheimer's disease. Early adult life effects of ε4 are less well understood. Working memory has been relatively little studied (compared to episodic memory) in relation to APOE genotype despite its importance in cognitive functioning. Our hypothesis was that ε4 would lead to an impairment in working memory in young adults.We studied working memory using a computerised n-back task in the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC) at age 18. Data was available for 1049-1927 participants and for the 2- and 3-back versions of the task. Using multiple and multi-level regression controlling for important confounders we examined the association between APOE genotype on accuracy and reaction times.There was no evidence of a genotype effect on accuracy when the two difficulty levels were examined separately. There was some evidence to support a deleterious effect of the ε4 allele on n-back accuracy in the multi-level regression. There was weak evidence that the ε22 group were less accurate but the numbers were very low in this group. The ε34 group had faster reaction times than the reference ε33 group in all adjusted analyses but the ε44 group were only faster in the 3-back condition in multi-level analyses.There was no evidence of benefit in ε4 carriers, but there was some evidence of a detrimental effect on working memory in this large study

Grassroots Training for Reproducible Science:A Consortium-Based Approach to the Empirical Dissertation

The publisher's final version this work can be found at https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1475725719857659. Deposited by openaccessbutton.org. We've taken reasonable steps to ensure this content doesn't violate copyright, however, if you think it does you can request a takedown by emailing [email protected]