Sung L, Hayden J, Greenberg ML, Koren G, Feldman BM, Tomlinson GA: Seven items were identified for inclusion when reporting a Bayesian analysis of a clinical study
Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
(Impact Factor: 3.42).
03/2005; 58(3):261-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2004.08.010
(1) To generate a list of items that experts consider most important when reporting a Bayesian analysis of a clinical study, (2) to report on the extent to which we found these items in the literature, and (3) to identify factors related to the number of items in a report.
Based on opinions from 23 international experts, we determined the items considered most important when publishing a Bayesian analysis. We then performed a literature search to identify articles in which a Bayesian analysis was performed and determined the extent to which we found these items in each report. Finally, we examined the relationship between the number of items in a report and journal- and article-specific attributes.
Our final set of seven items described the prior distribution (specification, justification, and sensitivity analysis), analysis (statistical model and analytic technique), and presentation of results (central tendency and variance). There was >99% probability that more items were reported in studies with a noncontrolled study design and in journals with a methodological focus, lower impact factor, and absence of a word count limit.
We developed a set of seven items that experts believe to be most important when reporting a Bayesian analysis.
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.