Search PubMed⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 9004378

Robustness considerations in Bayesian analysis.

P Gustafson
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

All statistical analyses demand uncertain inputs or assumptions. This is especially true of Bayesian analyses. In addition to the usual concerns about the agreement of the data and model, a Bayesian must contemplate the effect of an uncertain prior specification. The degree to which inferences are robust to changes in the prior is of primary interest. This article discusses some robust techniques that have been suggested in the literature. One goal is to make apparent the relevance of some of these techniques to biostatistical work.

Explore related subjects

Adrenergic beta-AntagonistsBayes TheoremClinical Trials as TopicData Interpretation, StatisticalHumansMarkov ChainsMeta-Analysis as TopicModels, StatisticalMonte Carlo MethodNormal DistributionProbabilityJournal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

P Gustafson. 1996. Robustness considerations in Bayesian analysis.. https://doi.org/10.1177/096228029600500403

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed1999

Treatment and prevention of sudden cardiac death: effect of recent clinical trials.

Tremendous strides have been made in recent years in the treatment and prevention of sudden cardiac death. Large scale trials have now established several interventions that may improve survival in patients susceptible to sudden cardiac death. In patients who have had a sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmia, the current therapy of choice is an implantable cardioverter defibrillator. For prophylaxis of sudden cardiac death in patients without a previous event, several approaches should be considered. Beta-Adrenergic blocking agents are an effective pharmacologic therapy in patients following myocardial infarction, and their efficacy has also most recently been demonstrated in patients with congestive heart failure. There is no Vaughan Williams class I or III antiarrhythmic drug that has demonstrated efficacy as a prophylactic agent to reduce mortality in these populations, with the possible exception of amiodarone. The best therapeutic approach for prophylactic therapy to prevent sudden cardiac death appears to be the implantable cardioverter defibrillator; however, its use can be justified only in patients at high risk for developing sudden cardiac death. Further work is needed to identify the high risk populations in which this therapy is warranted.

Adrenergic beta-Antagonists↗
PubMed1999

beta Blockade after myocardial infarction: systematic review and meta regression analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of beta blockers in short term treatment for acute myocardial infarction and in longer term secondary prevention; to examine predictive factors that may influence outcome and therefore choice of drug; and to examine the clinical importance of the results in the light of current treatment. DESIGN: Systematic review of randomised controlled trials. SETTING: Randomised controlled trials. SUBJECTS: Patients with acute or past myocardial infarction. INTERVENTION: beta Blockers compared with control. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: All cause mortality and non-fatal reinfarction. RESULTS: Overall, 5477 of 54 234 patients (10.1%) randomised to beta blockers or control died. We identified a 23% reduction in the odds of death in long term trials (95% confidence interval 15% to 31%), but only a 4% reduction in the odds of death in short term trials (-8% to 15%). Meta regression in long term trials did not identify a significant reduction in effectiveness in drugs with cardioselectivity but did identify a near significant trend towards decreased benefit in drugs with intrinsic sympathomimetic activity. Most evidence is available for propranolol, timolol, and metoprolol. In long term trials, the number needed to treat for 2 years to avoid a death is 42, which compares favourably with other treatments for patients with acute or past myocardial infarction. CONCLUSIONS: beta Blockers are effective in long term secondary prevention after myocardial infarction, but they are underused in such cases and lead to avoidable mortality and morbidity.

Adrenergic beta-Antagonists↗
PubMed1999

Prevention of implantable-defibrillator shocks by treatment with sotalol. d,l-Sotalol Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Study Group.

BACKGROUND: Patients with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators often receive adjunctive antiarrhythmic therapy to prevent frequent shocks. We tested the efficacy and safety of sotalol, a beta-blocker with class III antiarrhythmic effects, for this purpose. METHODS: In a multicenter trial, patients were stratified according to left ventricular ejection fraction (< or =0.30 or >0.30), randomly assigned to double-blind treatment with 160 to 320 mg of sotalol per day (151 patients) or matching placebo (151 patients), and followed for 12 months. Kaplan-Meier analyses of the time to an event were performed. Three end points were used: the delivery of a first shock for any reason or death from any cause, the first appropriate shock for a ventricular arrhythmia or death from any cause, and the first inappropriate shock for a supraventricular arrhythmia or death from any cause. RESULTS: Compliance with double-blind treatment was similar in the two groups. There were seven deaths in the placebo group and four in the sotalol group. As compared with placebo, treatment with sotalol was associated with a lower risk of death from any cause or the delivery of a first shock for any reason (reduction in risk, 48 percent; P<0.001 by the log-rank test), death from any cause or the delivery of a first appropriate shock (reduction in risk, 44 percent; P=0.007), or death from any cause or the delivery of a first inappropriate shock (reduction in risk, 64 percent; P=0.004). Sotalol also reduced the mean (+/-SD) frequency of shocks due to any cause (1.43+/-3.53 shocks per year, as compared with 3.89+/-10.65 in the placebo group; P=0.008). In the sotalol group, the reduction in the risk of death from any cause or the delivery of a first shock for any reason did not differ significantly between patients with ejection fractions of more than 0.30 and those with ejection fractions of 0.30 or less. CONCLUSIONS: Oral sotalol was safe and efficacious in reducing the risk of death or the delivery of a first defibrillator shock whether or not ventricular function was depressed.

Adrenergic beta-Antagonists↗