ArticleEntropy (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Reporting Standards for Bayesian Network Modelling.
Article in Entropy (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Developing a general research framework for long COVID using causal modelling.Communications medicine · 2026Article
- Central venous catheter infections: building a causal model with expert domain knowledge to inform future clinical trials.Antimicrobial resistance and infection control · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Reproducibility is a key measure of the veracity of a modelling result or finding. In other research areas, notably in medicine, reproducibility is supported by mandating the inclusion of an agreed set of details into every research publication, facilitating systematic reviews, transparency and reproducibility. Governments and international organisations are increasingly turning to modelling approaches in the development and decision-making for policy and have begun asking questions about accountability in model-based decision making. The ethical issues of relying on modelling that is biased, poorly constructed, constrained by heroic assumptions and not reproducible are multiplied when such models are used to underpin decisions impacting human and planetary well-being. Bayesian Network modelling is used in policy development and decision support across a wide range of domains. In light of the recent trend for governments and other organisations to demand accountability and transparency, we have compiled and tested a reporting checklist for Bayesian Network modelling which will bring the desirable level of transparency and reproducibility to enable models to support decision making and allow the robust comparison and combination of models. The use of this checklist would support the ethical use of Bayesian network modelling for impactful decision making and research.
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.