Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33445651›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2021

Sample Size Requirements for Calibrated Approximate Credible Intervals for Proportions in Clinical Trials.

Fulvio De Santis, Stefania Gubbiotti

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Fulvio De SantisDipartimento di Scienze Statistiche, Sapienza University of Rome, Piazzale Aldo Moro n. 5, 00185 Rome, Italy.
Stefania GubbiottiDipartimento di Scienze Statistiche, Sapienza University of Rome, Piazzale Aldo Moro n. 5, 00185 Rome, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In Bayesian analysis of clinical trials data, credible intervals are widely used for inference on unknown parameters of interest, such as treatment effects or differences in treatments effects. Highest Posterior Density (HPD) sets are often used because they guarantee the shortest length. In most of standard problems, closed-form expressions for exact HPD intervals do not exist, but they are available for intervals based on the normal approximation of the posterior distribution. For small sample sizes, approximate intervals may be not calibrated in terms of posterior probability, but for increasing sample sizes their posterior probability tends to the correct credible level and they become closer and closer to exact sets. The article proposes a predictive analysis to select appropriate sample sizes needed to have approximate intervals calibrated at a pre-specified level. Examples are given for interval estimation of proportions and log-odds.

Indexed as

Sample SizeBayes TheoremConfidence IntervalsProbabilitybayesian inferencehighest posterior density intervalsnormal approximationpredictive analysissample size determination

Identifiers

PMID33445651
PMCPMC7827664

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.