ReviewJournal of applied crystallography2023
Advice on describing Bayesian analysis of neutron and X-ray reflectometry.
Review in Journal of applied crystallography, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Emergence of Unconventional Magnetic Order in Strain-Engineered RuOAdvanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026Article
- Microsecond X-ray reflectometry.Journal of applied crystallography · 2026Article
- Optimal weights and priors in simultaneous fitting of multiple small-angle scattering datasets.Journal of applied crystallography · 2025Article
- Epitaxial graphene growth on cubic silicon carbide on silicon with high temperature neutron reflectometry: anRSC advances · 2024Article
- Advice on describing Bayesian analysis of neutron and X-ray reflectometry.Journal of applied crystallography · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
As a result of the availability of modern software and hardware, Bayesian analysis is becoming more popular in neutron and X-ray reflectometry analysis. The understandability and replicability of these analyses may be harmed by inconsistencies in how the probability distributions central to Bayesian methods are represented in the literature. Herein advice is provided on how to report the results of Bayesian analysis as applied to neutron and X-ray reflectometry. This includes the clear reporting of initial starting conditions, the prior probabilities, the results of any analysis and the posterior probabilities that are the Bayesian equivalent of the error bar, to enable replicability and improve understanding. It is believed that this advice, grounded in the authors' experience working in the field, will enable greater analytical reproducibility in the work of the reflectometry community, and improve the quality and usability of results.
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.