Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39417150›Full record

ArticleThe New England Journal of Statistics in Data Science2023

Effect of model space priors on statistical inference with model uncertainty.

Anupreet Porwal, Adrian E Raftery

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The New England Journal of Statistics in Data Science, 2023. 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.

Anupreet PorwalDepartment of Statistics, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, USA.
Adrian E RafteryDepartment of Statistics, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, USA.

Funding

Statistical Methods for Population ProjectionsR01HD070936 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI RAFTERY, ADRIAN E · 2012 to 2021
$3.3M
NICHD NIH HHS R01 HD070936
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Bayesian model averaging (BMA) provides a coherent way to account for model uncertainty in statistical inference tasks. BMA requires specification of model space priors and parameter space priors. In this article we focus on comparing different model space priors in presence of model uncertainty. We consider eight reference model space priors used in the literature and three adaptive parameter priors recommended by Porwal and Raftery [37]. We assess the performance of these combinations of prior specifications for variable selection in linear regression models for the statistical tasks of parameter estimation, interval estimation, inference, point and interval prediction. We carry out an extensive simulation study based on 14 real datasets representing a range of situations encountered in practice. We found that beta-binomial model space priors specified in terms of the prior probability of model size performed best on average across various statistical tasks and datasets, outperforming priors that were uniform across models. Recently proposed complexity priors performed relatively poorly.

Indexed as

Bayesian model averagingBeta-Binomial priorcomplexity priormodel selectionmodel space priorpredictionZellner’s g-prior

Identifiers

PMID39417150
PMCPMC11482600

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.