ArticlePloS one2024
Conditional independence as a statistical assessment of evidence integration processes.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Multisensory integration of stimulus-driven and goal-driven signals during urgent saccadic choices.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- The reliability of multisensory integration in enhancing behavioral performance.Neuroscience and biobehavioral reviews · 2026Review
- Article
- Location- and feature-based selection histories make independent, qualitatively distinct contributions to urgent visuomotor performance.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Intuitively, combining multiple sources of evidence should lead to more accurate decisions than considering single sources of evidence individually. In practice, however, the proper computation may be difficult, or may require additional data that are inaccessible. Here, based on the concept of conditional independence, we consider expressions that can serve either as recipes for integrating evidence based on limited data, or as statistical benchmarks for characterizing evidence integration processes. Consider three events, A, B, and C. We find that, if A and B are conditionally independent with respect to C, then the probability that C occurs given that both A and B are known, P(C|A, B), can be easily calculated without the need to measure the full three-way dependency between A, B, and C. This simplified approach can be used in two general ways: to generate predictions by combining multiple (conditionally independent) sources of evidence, or to test whether separate sources of evidence are functionally independent of each other. These applications are demonstrated with four computer-simulated examples, which include detecting a disease based on repeated diagnostic testing, inferring biological age based on multiple biomarkers of aging, discriminating two spatial locations based on multiple cue stimuli (multisensory integration), and examining how behavioral performance in a visual search task depends on selection histories. Besides providing a sound prescription for predicting outcomes, this methodology may be useful for analyzing experimental data of many types.
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.