Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41836475›Full record

ArticleJournal of applied statistics2026

Optimal group sizes for testing group mean differences using the Bayes factor.

Mirjam Moerbeek

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of applied statistics, 2026. 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

1 author.

Mirjam MoerbeekDepartment of Methodology and Statistics, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Determination of group sizes is an important issue when planning a study that aims to compare mean outcomes across groups. Using equal group sizes is not the best choice in the case of heterogeneous costs and/or variances. Conventional optimal design methodology has shown that groups with higher variance and lower costs should include more subjects. However, these results are based on the framework of null hypothesis significance testing, which has received severe criticism over the past decades. The Bayesian approach to hypothesis testing has been proposed as an alternative and uses the Bayes factor to quantify the support of a hypothesis given the data. Group sizes that maximize the Bayes factor are determined, and it is shown how these optimal group sizes depend on the variances, costs and group means. Furthermore, it is shown to what degree the Bayes factor becomes smaller while using conventional optimal design methodology or equal group sizes. The optimal design methodology is illustrated using examples on multidisciplinary pain management and psychological status and asthma outcomes. A Shiny app has been made available to facilitate the use of the optimal design methodology.

Indexed as

Analysis of varianceBayes factorbudgetary constraintinformative hypothesisoptimal design methodology

Identifiers

PMID41836475
PMCPMC12981267

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.