ArticleStatistics in medicine2016
Bayesian Peer Calibration with Application to Alcohol Use.
Article in Statistics in medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Using social network analysis to examine alcohol use among adults: A systematic review.PloS one · 2019Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Peers are often able to provide important additional information to supplement self-reported behavioral measures. The study motivating this work collected data on alcohol in a social network formed by college students living in a freshman dormitory. By using two imperfect sources of information (self-reported and peer-reported alcohol consumption), rather than solely self-reports or peer-reports, we are able to gain insight into alcohol consumption on both the population and the individual level, as well as information on the discrepancy of individual peer-reports. We develop a novel Bayesian comparative calibration model for continuous, count, and binary outcomes that uses covariate information to characterize the joint distribution of both self and peer-reports on the network for estimating peer-reporting discrepancies in network surveys, and apply this to the data for fully Bayesian inference. We use this model to understand the effects of covariates on both drinking behavior and peer-reporting discrepancies. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.