ArticleEuropean journal of hospital pharmacy : science and practice2021
Introduction to Bayesian statistics: a practical framework for clinical pharmacists.
Article in European journal of hospital pharmacy : science and practice, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesMost pharmaceutical investigations have relied on p values to infer conclusions from their study findings. Central to this paradigm is the concept of null hypothesis significance testing. This approach is however fraught with overuse and misinterpretations. Several alternatives have already been proposed, yet uptake remains low. In this study, we aimed to discuss the pitfalls of p value-based testing and to provide readers with the basics to apply Bayesian statistics.
methodsJeffreys's Amazing Statistical Package (JASP) was used to evaluate the effect of a clinical pharmacy (CP) intervention (opposed to usual care) on the number of emergency department (ED) visits without hospital admission. Basic Bayesian terminology was explained and compared with classical p value-based testing. In the study example, a Cauchy prior distribution was used to determine the effect size with a scale parameter r=0.707 at location=0 and Bayes factors (BF) were subsequently estimated. A robustness analysis was then performed to visualise the impact of different r values on the BF value.
resultsA BF of 4.082 was determined, indicating that the observed data were about four times more likely to occur under the alternative hypothesis that the CP intervention was effective. The median effect size of the CP intervention on ED visits was found to be 0.337 with a 95% credible interval of 0.074 to 0.635. A robustness check was performed and all BF values were in favour of the CP intervention.
conclusionBayesian inference can be an important addition to the statistical armamentarium of pharmacists, who should become more acquainted with the basic terminology and rationale of such testing. To prove our point, Jeffreys' approach was applied to a CP study example, using an easy-to-use software program JASP.
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.