# We can work on Power and Sample Size Determination.

Textbook: Sullivan, L. M. (2018). Essentials of biostatistics in public health (3rd ed.). Jones & Bartlett Learning.
https://online.vitalsource.com/#/books/9781284142853
For this assignment, you will have the opportunity to develop a scholarly paper about power and sample size determination. Within the content of the paper,
you will have the opportunity to examine three different examples of sample size. Please use issues related to public health.
Select two journal articles where a sample size is identified using the CSU Online Library databases for your search. Ensure the articles were published within
the past five years.
Be sure to include the following in the content of your paper:
In the first section, explain your thoughts concerning what would have happened if the studies had a much smaller or limited number of participants
(instead of the number of participants they actually had) to support a valid research study.
For the second section, explain your thoughts about what could have happened if the researchers had too many participants (more than they actually had),
and this became a strain on finances and resources.
In the third section, explain how your selected research articles incorporated key themes from power and sample size determination.
In the fourth section, identify why the samples in the studies were estimated to be the right sizes for the population under study.
Next, explain how the margin of error, effect size, and variability of the outcome affect sample size computations.
Finally, compare and contrast the three sample scenarios you identified above (too many, too few, and the ideal number of participants) for the two
articles. How would the results have been similar or different depending on the sample sizes? You may create a chart with columns and rows for this final
section.

Sample Solution

regards to the osmosis of pieces into lumps. Mill operator recognizes pieces and lumps of data, the differentiation being that a piece is comprised of various pieces of data. It is fascinating to take note of that while there is a limited ability to recall lumps of data, how much pieces in every one of those lumps can change broadly (Miller, 1956). Anyway it’s anything but a straightforward instance of having the memorable option huge pieces right away, somewhat that as each piece turns out to be more natural, it very well may be acclimatized into a lump, which is then recollected itself. Recoding is the interaction by which individual pieces are ‘recoded’ and allocated to lumps. Consequently the ends that can be drawn from Miller’s unique work is that, while there is an acknowledged breaking point to the quantity of pieces of data that can be put away in prompt (present moment) memory, how much data inside every one of those lumps can be very high, without unfavorably influencing the review of similar number>