Method document
Sample size to estimate several category proportions at once
How many participants are needed to estimate the share of every category of a variable, such as blood groups or levels of a scale, so that all the intervals are within a chosen margin together. Covers finite populations, cluster sampling, stratified sampling and non-response.
https://statwisely.com/methods/precision-multinomial/
When to use it
- Describing the whole distribution of a categorical variable, when every category’s share matters.
Not for
- A single category of interest, such as the prevalence of one condition. Use a single proportion, which needs fewer participants.
- Testing whether distributions differ between groups, which is a test of independence. To estimate the shares within each group, set the number of groups.
Notation
- Sample size under simple random sampling
- Number of categories (and, under clustering, of clusters; the context makes clear which)
- Expected proportion in category i
- Margin of error for every category, on the proportion scale
- Chi-square quantile with 1 degree of freedom at 1 − α/k
- Number of groups, each planned to the same precision
- Standard normal quantile for confidence 1 − α (1.960 for 95%)
- Population size
- Design effect
- Intracluster correlation coefficient (ICC)
- Usable observations per cluster
- Coefficient of variation of cluster size
- Clusters in the population
- Population share of stratum h
- Sample share of stratum h, set by the allocation
- Non-response rate
Formulas
Simple random sampling
Goodman’s simultaneous intervals: the confidence level is shared across the k categories, so that all k intervals hold together with confidence 1 − α [1]. Separate 95% intervals would cover all categories at once with well under 95% confidence. Without expected shares, the widest possible category, p = 0.5, is assumed.
Several groups
Optional. When every category proportion is wanted in each of g independent groups, each group needs the one-group n. Read together, g intervals each at 95% all hold less than 95% of the time; choosing simultaneous intervals splits α across the groups (Bonferroni), which guarantees the joint level at the cost of a larger n in each group. Cluster sampling is not offered with several groups, and a population size applies to each group.
Finite population correction
Applied when a population size is given [3]. It matters only when the sample is a sizeable share of the population, and is not offered with cluster sampling.
Design effect from an ICC
For clusters of equal size [4]. A design effect can also be entered directly, in which case no ICC is used.
Unequal cluster sizes
When each cluster is given its own share s_j of the sample, the CV of those shares enlarges the design effect [5]. With a design effect entered directly the shares only divide the sample, since a measured design effect already reflects its survey’s cluster sizes.
Number of clusters for a chosen cluster size
The requirement is rounded up to whole clusters, so the total can exceed n × DE slightly. At least two clusters are needed to estimate between-cluster variation.
Cluster size for a fixed number of clusters
Solving k·m = n·DE for m. Below that number of clusters no cluster size reaches the margin, because each extra person per cluster adds less and less information; the calculator reports the minimum number of clusters instead.
Sampling a share of a finite set of clusters
Optional. When the clusters sampled are a sizeable share of the C there are, the between-cluster part of the variance shrinks by 1 − k/C, and the number of clusters has the closed form shown [3]. People within a cluster are taken as a small share of it, the cautious side. The people-level correction does not apply to a cluster sample.
Stratified sampling
Optional. When every stratum (region, urban or rural area) is sampled, the strata add no design effect of their own; an allocation away from the population shares weights respondents unequally, which costs the combined estimate Kish’s weighting effect DE_w, 1 for proportional allocation [4]. It multiplies the cluster design effect when clusters are sampled within the strata. Every stratum can instead be sized for its own margin, and finite strata carry their own corrections: see “Sample size for a stratified survey” for the allocations, those options and worked examples.
Few clusters
Optional. With few clusters the interval is built on k − 1 degrees of freedom, so the normal critical value is replaced by t. Because k depends on n, this is iterated until it settles.
Non-response
The number to approach so that n respond. Applied last, after any clustering.
Parameters
Confidence level
Values: 90%, 95% or 99%
95% is the convention in health research. A higher level widens the interval, so the same margin needs a larger sample.
Margin of error
Values: Above 0 and below 1 on the proportion scale
The margin every category’s interval must meet.
Number of categories
Values: A whole number of at least 2
Used when no expected shares are given. More categories split the confidence level further, so they cost more participants.
Expected proportionsOptional
Values: One value per category, each above 0, adding to 1
Give them when known: only the category nearest 50% drives the requirement, so shares away from 50% reduce it.
Number of groupsOptional
Values: A whole number of at least 1; 1 for one sample
The independent groups, such as study arms or exposure categories, in which the same estimate is wanted.
Simultaneous intervals across groupsOptional
Values: On or off
Turn on when the groups will be compared or read together, so that every interval holds at once.
Population sizeOptional
Values: A whole number of at least 2
Leave empty for a large population. It matters only when the sample would be more than about 5% of the population. Not available with cluster sampling.
Expected non-response rateOptional
Values: 0% up to, but not including, 100%
The share of people approached who will not take part; use the response rate of a comparable study. Approaching more people restores the number of respondents, not their representativeness: if non-responders differ, the estimate can still be biased.
Intracluster correlation (ICC)Optional
Values: From 0 to 1
The share of the outcome’s variation that lies between clusters. Published ICCs for health outcomes in primary-care and community clusters are mostly small, often below 0.05 [7], but depend on the outcome and the kind of cluster; prefer an estimate from a comparable study.
Design effectOptional
Values: Above 0; usually between 1 and 3
An alternative to the ICC, when a previous study of the same design reports its design effect.
Observations per clusterOptional
Values: A whole number of at least 1
Usable responses per cluster. Larger clusters are cheaper to reach, but when the ICC is above zero each additional person in a cluster adds less information.
Number of clustersOptional
Values: A whole number of at least 2
Instead of a cluster size, when the clusters are fixed: the emirates of a country, the schools of a district. The calculator then finds the cluster size, or reports how many clusters the margin needs.
Share of the sample for each clusterOptional
Values: One positive value per cluster, on any scale
When clusters will contribute unequally, for example in proportion to their population. With an ICC, unequal shares enlarge the design effect [5].
Population share of each stratumOptional
Values: Positive, adding to 100%, for at least two strata
Tick “Stratified sampling” to use it. From a census or sampling frame.
Allocation across strataOptional
Values: Proportional, square root, equal, Neyman or custom
Proportional costs nothing; move towards equal when small strata must be reported on.
What the margin is forOptional
Values: The combined estimate, or every stratum on its own
Every stratum on its own usually costs far more people.
Clusters in the populationOptional
Values: A whole number, at least the clusters sampled
Leave empty when the clusters sampled are a small share of all there are. Give it when they are not, say 20 of 40 districts; the design effect then falls.
Correction for few clustersOptional
Values: On or off
Uses t on k − 1 degrees of freedom instead of the normal distribution. Worth applying when there are few clusters, roughly fewer than 30.
Assumptions
- Participants, or clusters, are selected at random, and respond independently apart from the clustering specified.
- Every category is expected to hold enough people for the normal approximation to apply.
- Without expected shares the result is conservative, because no real distribution has every category at 50%. Thompson’s method finds the least favourable distribution instead and gives a smaller sample [2].
- With clustering, one ICC is assumed for the membership indicators of all categories, or the largest category-specific ICC as a conservative bound.
- With cluster sampling: one ICC applies to every cluster; clusters are of equal size unless shares are given; the sampled clusters are a small fraction of all clusters; and the analysis accounts for the clustering, for example with survey-design standard errors [4, 6].
- Non-response is unrelated to the outcome.
Worked examples
Four categories, shares unknown
4 categories, margin ±5 points: χ²₁ at 1 − 0.05/4 is 6.239, so n = 6.239 × 0.25 / 0.05² = 623.85, rounded up to 624.
Sample size: 624
Open this example in the calculatorProtocol statement
To estimate the proportions of 4 categories simultaneously with 95% confidence and a margin of error of ±5 percentage points, the required sample size is 624 participants. Calculated with StatWisely (statwisely.com) using: n = χ²_(1-α/k, 1) × max pᵢ(1-pᵢ) / E², Goodman simultaneous intervals over k categories. These are planning estimates; confirm the final design with a qualified statistician.
Four categories with expected shares
Expected shares 40%, 30%, 20% and 10%: the widest is 40%, with 0.4 × 0.6 = 0.24, so n = 6.239 × 0.24 / 0.05² = 598.9, rounded up to 599.
Sample size: 599
Open this example in the calculatorCluster sampling with an ICC
ICC 0.02 and 20 per cluster: DE = 1 + 19 × 0.02 = 1.38. Then 624 × 1.38 = 861.1, so 44 clusters and 880 participants.
Sample size: 880
Open this example in the calculatorCategory proportions in each of two groups
The same four categories estimated in each of 2 groups, each group on its own: 624 per group, 1248 in all.
Group 1: 624 · Group 2: 624 · Total: 1248
Open this example in the calculatorValidation
- Every worked example on this page is recomputed by the StatWisely engine whenever the software is built. If a number or formula here stopped matching the calculator, the release would be stopped until this document was corrected.
- An independent implementation in R recomputes this procedure, with and without cluster sampling, every night and before each production release, and the results are compared with the engine’s.
- The basic result agrees with the closed form: 6.239 × 0.25 / 0.0025 = 623.85, rounded up to 624. In R, ceiling(qchisq(1 - 0.05/4, 1) * 0.25 / 0.05^2) returns 624.
How to cite
StatWisely. Sample size to estimate several category proportions at once. Method document, engine version 1.0.0, reviewed 2026-10-08. https://statwisely.com/methods/precision-multinomial/
Cite the original references for the formulas your design uses as well.
References
- 1.Goodman LA. On simultaneous confidence intervals for multinomial proportions. Technometrics. 1965;7(2):247–254.
- 2.Thompson SK. Sample size for estimating multinomial proportions. The American Statistician. 1987;41(1):42–46.
- 3.Cochran WG. Sampling Techniques. 3rd ed. New York: John Wiley & Sons; 1977.
- 4.Kish L. Survey Sampling. New York: John Wiley & Sons; 1965.
- 5.Eldridge SM, Ashby D, Kerry S. Sample size for cluster randomized trials: effect of coefficient of variation of cluster size and analysis method. International Journal of Epidemiology. 2006;35(5):1292–1300. doi:10.1093/ije/dyl129
- 6.Donner A, Klar N. Design and Analysis of Cluster Randomization Trials in Health Research. London: Arnold; 2000.
- 7.Adams G, Gulliford MC, Ukoumunne OC, Eldridge S, Chinn S, Campbell MJ. Patterns of intra-cluster correlation from primary care research to inform study design and analysis. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. 2004;57(8):785–794. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2003.12.013