ArticleBMC medical research methodology2022
Informed Bayesian survival analysis.
Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A systematic review of sample size determination in Bayesian randomized clinical trials: full Bayesian methods are rarely used.BMC medical research methodology · 2026Pooled it
- The neurobiological cravings signature (NCS) as a predictive neuromarker of clinical outcomes in alcohol use disorder.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2026Article
- A comparative analysis of parametric, semiparametric and machine learning models for survival prediction.BMC medical research methodology · 2026Article
- Geospatial Variation and Determinants of Time to Pregnancy Loss Among Reproductive-Aged Women in East Africa: Bayesian Spatial Frailty Model.BioMed research international · 2026Article
- A Bayesian Approach to Compare Accumulating Survival Data From Clinical Practice With RCT Data: A Case Study in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Patients.CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology · 2025Article
- Start Time End Time Integration (STETI): Method for Including Recent Data to Analyze Trends in Kidney Cancer Survival.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Data-driven prior elicitation for Bayes factors in Cox regression for nine subfields in biomedicine.PloS one · 2025Article
- Advanced statistical methods for hazard modeling in cardiothoracic surgery: a comprehensive review of techniques and approaches.Indian journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery · 2024Article
- Applications of the prediction of satisfaction design for monitoring single-arm phase II trials.PloS one · 2024Article
- High Adherence to a Mediterranean Alcohol-Drinking Pattern and Mediterranean Diet Can Mitigate the Harmful Effect of Alcohol on Mortality Risk.Nutrients · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe provide an overview of Bayesian estimation, hypothesis testing, and model-averaging and illustrate how they benefit parametric survival analysis. We contrast the Bayesian framework to the currently dominant frequentist approach and highlight advantages, such as seamless incorporation of historical data, continuous monitoring of evidence, and incorporating uncertainty about the true data generating process.
methodsWe illustrate the application of the outlined Bayesian approaches on an example data set, retrospective re-analyzing a colon cancer trial. We assess the performance of Bayesian parametric survival analysis and maximum likelihood survival models with AIC/BIC model selection in fixed-n and sequential designs with a simulation study.
resultsIn the retrospective re-analysis of the example data set, the Bayesian framework provided evidence for the absence of a positive treatment effect of adding Cetuximab to FOLFOX6 regimen on disease-free survival in patients with resected stage III colon cancer. Furthermore, the Bayesian sequential analysis would have terminated the trial 10.3 months earlier than the standard frequentist analysis. In a simulation study with sequential designs, the Bayesian framework on average reached a decision in almost half the time required by the frequentist counterparts, while maintaining the same power, and an appropriate false-positive rate. Under model misspecification, the Bayesian framework resulted in higher false-negative rate compared to the frequentist counterparts, which resulted in a higher proportion of undecided trials. In fixed-n designs, the Bayesian framework showed slightly higher power, slightly elevated error rates, and lower bias and RMSE when estimating treatment effects in small samples. We found no noticeable differences for survival predictions. We have made the analytic approach readily available to other researchers in the RoBSA R package.
conclusionsThe outlined Bayesian framework provides several benefits when applied to parametric survival analyses. It uses data more efficiently, is capable of considerably shortening the length of clinical trials, and provides a richer set of inferences.
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.