# Experimental Design Patterns ## Common Approaches to Testing Scientific Hypotheses This reference provides patterns and frameworks for designing experiments across scientific domains. Use these patterns to develop rigorous tests for generated hypotheses. ## Design Selection Framework Choose experimental approaches based on: - **Nature of hypothesis:** Mechanistic, causal, correlational, descriptive - **System studied:** In vitro, in vivo, computational, observational - **Feasibility:** Time, cost, ethics, technical capabilities - **Evidence needed:** Proof-of-concept, causal demonstration, quantitative relationship ## Laboratory Experimental Designs ### In Vitro Experiments **When to use:** Testing molecular, cellular, or biochemical mechanisms in controlled systems. **Common patterns:** #### 1. Dose-Response Studies - **Purpose:** Establish quantitative relationship between input and effect - **Design:** Test multiple concentrations/doses of intervention - **Key elements:** - Negative control (no treatment) - Positive control (known effective treatment) - Multiple dose levels (typically 5-8 points) - Technical replicates (≥3 per condition) - Appropriate statistical analysis (curve fitting, IC50/EC50 determination) **Example application:** "To test if compound X inhibits enzyme Y, measure enzyme activity at 0, 1, 10, 100, 1000 nM compound X concentrations with n=3 replicates per dose." #### 2. Gain/Loss of Function Studies - **Purpose:** Establish causal role of specific component - **Design:** Add (overexpression) or remove (knockout/knockdown) component - **Key elements:** - Wild-type control - Gain-of-function condition (overexpression, constitutive activation) - Loss-of-function condition (knockout, knockdown, inhibition) - Rescue experiment (restore function to loss-of-function) - Measure downstream effects **Example application:** "Test if protein X causes phenotype Y by: (1) knocking out X and observing phenotype loss, (2) overexpressing X and observing phenotype enhancement, (3) rescuing knockout with X re-expression." #### 3. Time-Course Studies - **Purpose:** Understand temporal dynamics and sequence of events - **Design:** Measure outcomes at multiple time points - **Key elements:** - Time 0 baseline - Early time points (capture rapid changes) - Intermediate time points - Late time points (steady state) - Sufficient replication at each time point **Example application:** "Measure protein phosphorylation at 0, 5, 15, 30, 60, 120 minutes after stimulus to determine peak activation timing." ### In Vivo Experiments **When to use:** Testing hypotheses in whole organisms to assess systemic, physiological, or behavioral effects. **Common patterns:** #### 4. Between-Subjects Designs - **Purpose:** Compare different groups receiving different treatments - **Design:** Randomly assign subjects to treatment groups - **Key elements:** - Random assignment to groups - Appropriate sample size (power analysis) - Control group (vehicle, sham, or standard treatment) - Blinding (single or double-blind) - Standardized conditions across groups **Example application:** "Randomly assign 20 mice each to vehicle control or drug treatment groups, measure tumor size weekly for 8 weeks, with experimenters blinded to group assignment." #### 5. Within-Subjects (Repeated Measures) Designs - **Purpose:** Each subject serves as own control, reducing inter-subject variability - **Design:** Same subjects measured across multiple conditions/time points - **Key elements:** - Baseline measurements - Counterbalancing (if order effects possible) - Washout periods (for sequential treatments) - Appropriate repeated-measures statistics **Example application:** "Measure cognitive performance in same participants at baseline, after training intervention, and at 3-month follow-up." #### 6. Factorial Designs - **Purpose:** Test multiple factors and their interactions simultaneously - **Design:** Cross all levels of multiple independent variables - **Key elements:** - Clear main effects and interactions - Sufficient power for interaction tests - Full factorial or fractional factorial as appropriate **Example application:** "2×2 design crossing genotype (WT vs. mutant) × treatment (vehicle vs. drug) to test whether drug effect depends on genotype." ### Computational/Modeling Experiments **When to use:** Testing hypotheses about complex systems, making predictions, or when physical experiments are infeasible. #### 7. In Silico Simulations - **Purpose:** Model complex systems, test theoretical predictions - **Design:** Implement computational model and vary parameters - **Key elements:** - Well-defined model with explicit assumptions - Parameter sensitivity analysis - Validation against known data - Prediction generation for experimental testing **Example application:** "Build agent-based model of disease spread, vary transmission rate and intervention timing, compare predictions to empirical epidemic data." #### 8. Bioinformatics/Meta-Analysis - **Purpose:** Test hypotheses using existing datasets - **Design:** Analyze large-scale data or aggregate multiple studies - **Key elements:** - Appropriate statistical corrections (multiple testing) - Validation in independent datasets - Control for confounds and batch effects - Clear inclusion/exclusion criteria **Example application:** "Test if gene X expression correlates with survival across 15 cancer datasets (n>5000 patients total), using Cox regression with clinical covariates." ## Observational Study Designs ### When Physical Manipulation is Impossible or Unethical #### 9. Cross-Sectional Studies - **Purpose:** Examine associations at a single time point - **Design:** Measure variables of interest in population at one time - **Strengths:** Fast, inexpensive, can establish prevalence - **Limitations:** Cannot establish temporality or causation - **Key elements:** - Representative sampling - Standardized measurements - Control for confounding variables - Appropriate statistical analysis **Example application:** "Survey 1000 adults to test association between diet pattern and biomarker X, controlling for age, sex, BMI, and physical activity." #### 10. Cohort Studies (Prospective/Longitudinal) - **Purpose:** Establish temporal relationships and potentially causal associations - **Design:** Follow group over time, measuring exposures and outcomes - **Strengths:** Can establish temporality, calculate incidence - **Limitations:** Time-consuming, expensive, subject attrition - **Key elements:** - Baseline exposure assessment - Follow-up at defined intervals - Minimize loss to follow-up - Account for time-varying confounders **Example application:** "Follow 5000 initially healthy individuals for 10 years, testing if baseline vitamin D levels predict cardiovascular disease incidence." #### 11. Case-Control Studies - **Purpose:** Efficiently study rare outcomes by comparing cases to controls - **Design:** Identify cases with outcome, select matched controls, compare exposures - **Strengths:** Efficient for rare diseases, relatively quick - **Limitations:** Recall bias, selection bias, cannot calculate incidence - **Key elements:** - Clear case definition - Appropriate control selection (matching or statistical adjustment) - Retrospective exposure assessment - Control for confounding **Example application:** "Compare 200 patients with rare disease X to 400 matched controls without X, testing if early-life exposure Y differs between groups." ## Clinical Trial Designs #### 12. Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) - **Purpose:** Gold standard for testing interventions in humans - **Design:** Randomly assign participants to treatment or control - **Key elements:** - Randomization (simple, block, or stratified) - Concealment of allocation - Blinding (participants, providers, assessors) - Intention-to-treat analysis - Pre-registered protocol and analysis plan **Example application:** "Double-blind RCT: randomly assign 300 patients to receive drug X or placebo for 12 weeks, measure primary outcome of symptom improvement." #### 13. Crossover Trials - **Purpose:** Each participant receives all treatments in sequence - **Design:** Participants crossed over between treatments with washout - **Strengths:** Reduces inter-subject variability, requires fewer participants - **Limitations:** Order effects, requires reversible conditions, longer duration - **Key elements:** - Adequate washout period - Randomized treatment order - Carryover effect assessment **Example application:** "Crossover trial: participants receive treatment A for 4 weeks, 2-week washout, then treatment B for 4 weeks (randomized order)." ## Advanced Design Considerations ### Sample Size and Statistical Power **Key questions:** - What effect size is meaningful to detect? - What statistical test will be used? - What alpha (significance level) and beta (power) are appropriate? - What is expected variability in the measurement? **General guidelines:** - Conduct formal power analysis before experiment - For pilot studies, n≥10 per group minimum - For definitive studies, aim for ≥80% power - Account for potential attrition in longitudinal studies ### Controls **Types of controls:** - **Negative control:** No intervention (baseline) - **Positive control:** Known effective intervention (validates system) - **Vehicle control:** Delivery method without active ingredient - **Sham control:** Mimics intervention without active component (surgery, etc.) - **Historical control:** Prior data (weakest, avoid if possible) ### Blinding **Levels:** - **Open-label:** No blinding (acceptable for objective measures) - **Single-blind:** Participants blinded (reduces placebo effects) - **Double-blind:** Participants and experimenters blinded (reduces bias in assessment) - **Triple-blind:** Participants, experimenters, and analysts blinded (strongest) ### Replication **Technical replicates:** Repeated measurements on same sample - Reduce measurement error - Typically 2-3 replicates sufficient **Biological replicates:** Independent samples/subjects - Address biological variability - Critical for generalization - Minimum: n≥3, preferably n≥5-10 per group **Experimental replicates:** Repeat entire experiment - Validate findings across time, equipment, operators - Gold standard for confirming results ### Confound Control **Strategies:** - **Randomization:** Distribute confounds evenly across groups - **Matching:** Pair similar subjects across conditions - **Blocking:** Group by confound, then randomize within blocks - **Statistical adjustment:** Measure confounds and adjust in analysis - **Standardization:** Keep conditions constant across groups ## Selecting Appropriate Design **Decision tree:** 1. **Can variables be manipulated?** - Yes → Experimental design (RCT, lab experiment) - No → Observational design (cohort, case-control, cross-sectional) 2. **What is the system?** - Cells/molecules → In vitro experiments - Whole organisms → In vivo experiments - Humans → Clinical trials or observational studies - Complex systems → Computational modeling 3. **What is the primary goal?** - Mechanism → Gain/loss of function, dose-response - Causation → RCT, cohort study with good controls - Association → Cross-sectional, case-control - Prediction → Modeling, machine learning - Temporal dynamics → Time-course, longitudinal 4. **What are the constraints?** - Time limited → Cross-sectional, in vitro - Budget limited → Computational, observational - Ethical concerns → Observational, in vitro - Rare outcome → Case-control, meta-analysis ## Integrating Multiple Approaches Strong hypothesis testing often combines multiple designs: **Example: Testing if microbiome affects cognitive function** 1. **Observational:** Cohort study showing association between microbiome composition and cognition 2. **Animal model:** Germ-free mice receiving microbiome transplants show cognitive changes 3. **Mechanism:** In vitro studies showing microbial metabolites affect neuronal function 4. **Clinical trial:** RCT of probiotic intervention improving cognitive scores 5. **Computational:** Model predicting which microbiome profiles should affect cognition **Triangulation approach:** - Each design addresses different aspects/limitations - Convergent evidence from multiple approaches strengthens causal claims - Start with observational/in vitro, then move to definitive causal tests ## Common Pitfalls - Insufficient sample size (underpowered) - Lack of appropriate controls - Confounding variables not accounted for - Inappropriate statistical tests - P-hacking or multiple testing without correction - Lack of blinding when subjective assessments involved - Failure to replicate findings - Not pre-registering analysis plans (clinical trials) ## Practical Application for Hypothesis Testing When designing experiments to test hypotheses: 1. **Match design to hypothesis specifics:** Causal claims require experimental manipulation; associations can use observational designs 2. **Start simple, then elaborate:** Pilot with simple design, then add complexity 3. **Plan controls carefully:** Controls validate the system and isolate the specific effect 4. **Consider feasibility:** Balance ideal design with practical constraints 5. **Plan for multiple experiments:** Rarely does one experiment definitively test a hypothesis 6. **Pre-specify analysis:** Decide statistical tests before data collection 7. **Build in validation:** Independent replication, orthogonal methods, convergent evidence