Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30847434›Full record

ArticleJournal of healthcare informatics research2019

A Patient-Centered Proposal for Bayesian Analysis of Self-Experiments for Health.

Jessica Schroeder, Ravi Karkar, James Fogarty, Julie A Kientz, Sean A Munson, Matthew Kay

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of healthcare informatics research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Informing the Design of Individualized Self-Management Regimens from the Human, Data, and Machine Learning Perspectives.ACM transactions on computer-human interaction : a publication of the Association for Computing Machinery · 2025
    Article
  4. From Reflection to Action: Combining Machine Learning with Expert Knowledge for Nutrition Goal Recommendations.Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems. CHI Conference · 2021
    Article
  5. "They don't always think about that": Translational Needs in the Design of Personal Health Informatics Applications.Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems. CHI Conference · 2021
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Examining Opportunities for Goal-Directed Self-Tracking to Support Chronic Condition Management.Proceedings of the ACM on interactive, mobile, wearable and ubiquitous technologies · 2019
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Jessica SchroederUniversity of Washington, Seattle, WA.
Ravi KarkarUniversity of Washington, Seattle, WA.
James FogartyUniversity of Washington, Seattle, WA.
Julie A KientzUniversity of Washington, Seattle, WA.
Sean A MunsonUniversity of Washington, Seattle, WA.
Matthew KayUniversity of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.

Funding

Sharing Patient Lifelog Data with the Primary Care Team for Two Patient Populations: Preventative Care & Chronic Disease ManagementR21HS023654 · AHRQ · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI MUNSON, SEAN · 2014 to 2015
$297k
AHRQ HHS R21 HS023654
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The rise of affordable sensors and apps has enabled people to monitor various health indicators via self-tracking. This trend encourages self-experimentation, a subset of self-tracking in which a person systematically explores potential causal relationships to try to answer questions about their health. Although recent research has investigated how to support the data collection necessary for self-experiments, less research has considered the best way to analyze data resulting from these self-experiments. Most tools default to using traditional frequentist methods. However, the US Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality recommends using Bayesian analysis for n-of-1 studies, arguing from a statistical perspective. To develop a complementary patient-centered perspective on the potential benefits of Bayesian analysis, this paper describes types of questions people want to answer via self-experimentation, as informed by 1) our experiences engaging with irritable bowel syndrome patients and their healthcare providers and 2) a survey investigating what questions individuals want to answer about their health and wellness. We provide examples of how those questions might be answered using 1) frequentist null hypothesis significance testing, 2) frequentist estimation, and 3) Bayesian estimation and prediction. We then provide design recommendations for analyses and visualizations that could help people answer and interpret such questions. We find the majority of the questions people want to answer with self-tracking data are better answered with Bayesian methods than with frequentist methods. Our results therefore provide patient-centered support for the use of Bayesian analysis for n-of-1 studies.

Indexed as

Bayesian analysisinterface designn-of-1self-experimentself-trackinguser-centered design

Identifiers

PMID30847434
PMCPMC6398612

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.