ArticleStatistics in medicine2026
Bayesian Hierarchical Models With Calibrated Mixtures of g-priors for Assessing Treatment Effect Moderation in Meta-Analysis.
Article in Statistics in medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Assessing treatment effect moderation is critical in biomedical science and many other fields, as it guides personalized interventions to improve individual health outcomes. Individual participant-level data meta-analysis (IPD-MA) offers a robust framework for such assessments by leveraging data from multiple studies. However, its performance is often compromised by real-world challenges, including but not limited to high between-study variability or small magnitude of moderation effect. Traditional Bayesian shrinkage methods have gained popularity in addressing these challenges, but are less suitable in MA, as their priors do not discern heterogeneous studies. In this paper, we propose calibrated mixtures of g-priors in IPD-MA to enhance efficiency and reduce risks in estimating moderation effects, providing a novel series of priors tailored for multiple studies by incorporating a study-level calibration parameter and a moderator-level shrinkage. This design offers a flexible range of shrinkage levels, allowing practitioners to evaluate moderator importance from conservative and optimistic perspectives. Compared with existing Bayesian shrinkage methods, our simulation studies demonstrate that calibrated mixtures of g-priors exhibit equivalent or superior performances in estimating moderation effects. The benefits of the proposed methods are particularly pronounced in scenarios with high between-study variability, high model sparsity, weak moderation effects, and correlated design matrices. We illustrate their application in assessing moderators of two treatments for major depressive disorder, using IPD from four randomized controlled trials.
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.