Assessment of vague and noninformative priors for Bayesian estimation of the realized random effects in random-effects meta-analysis

被引:1
|
作者
Bodnar, Olha [1 ]
Elster, Clemens [1 ]
机构
[1] Phys Tech Bundesanstalt, Abbestr 2-12, D-10587 Berlin, Germany
关键词
Random-effects model; Bayesian estimation; Reference prior; Newtonian constant of gravitation; BETWEEN-STUDY HETEROGENEITY; RANDOM EFFECTS MODEL; PRIOR DISTRIBUTIONS; VARIANCE-COMPONENTS; BINARY OUTCOMES; INFORMATION; TRIALS; SIMULATION; CONSTANTS; INFERENCE;
D O I
10.1007/s10182-016-0279-7
中图分类号
O21 [概率论与数理统计]; C8 [统计学];
学科分类号
020208 ; 070103 ; 0714 ;
摘要
Random-effects meta-analysis has become a well-established tool applied in many areas, for example, when combining the results of several clinical studies on a treatment effect. Typically, the inference aims at the common mean and the amount of heterogeneity. In some applications, the laboratory effects are of interest, for example, when assessing uncertainties quoted by laboratories participating in an interlaboratory comparison in metrology. We consider the Bayesian estimation of the realized random effects in random-effects meta-analysis. Several vague and noninformative priors are examined as well as a proposed novel one. Conditions are established that ensure propriety of the posteriors for the realized random effects. We present extensive simulation results that assess the inference in dependence on the choice of prior as well as mis-specifications in the statistical model. Overall good performance is observed for all priors with the novel prior showing the most promising results. Finally, the uncertainties reported by eleven national metrology institutes and universities for their measurements on the Newtonian constant of gravitation are assessed.
引用
收藏
页码:1 / 20
页数:20
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Fixed- and random-effects models in meta-analysis
    Hedges, LV
    Vevea, JL
    [J]. PSYCHOLOGICAL METHODS, 1998, 3 (04) : 486 - 504
  • [22] The interpretation of random-effects meta-analysis in decision models
    Ades, AE
    Lu, G
    Higgins, JPT
    [J]. MEDICAL DECISION MAKING, 2005, 25 (06) : 646 - 654
  • [23] Assessing the amount of heterogeneity in random-effects meta-analysis
    Knapp, G
    Biggerstaff, BJ
    Hartung, J
    [J]. BIOMETRICAL JOURNAL, 2006, 48 (02) : 271 - 285
  • [24] A re-evaluation of random-effects meta-analysis
    Higgins, Julian P. T.
    Thompson, Simon G.
    Spiegelhalter, David J.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL STATISTICAL SOCIETY SERIES A-STATISTICS IN SOCIETY, 2009, 172 : 137 - 159
  • [25] Comparison of two random-effects methods of meta-analysis
    Hall, SM
    Brannick, MT
    [J]. JOURNAL OF APPLIED PSYCHOLOGY, 2002, 87 (02) : 377 - 389
  • [26] Heterogeneity and study size in random-effects meta-analysis
    Bowater, Russell J.
    Escarela, Gabriel
    [J]. JOURNAL OF APPLIED STATISTICS, 2013, 40 (01) : 2 - 16
  • [27] Estimation of a Matrix of Heterogeneity Parameters in Multivariate Meta-Analysis of Random-Effects Models
    Abera Wouhib
    [J]. Journal of Statistical Theory and Applications, 2014, 13 (1): : 46 - 64
  • [28] Bivariate random-effects meta-analysis and the estimation of between-study correlation
    Riley, Richard D.
    Abrams, Keith R.
    Sutton, Alexander J.
    Lambert, Paul C.
    Thompson, John R.
    [J]. BMC MEDICAL RESEARCH METHODOLOGY, 2007, 7 (1)
  • [29] Comments on 'Sequential methods for random-effects meta-analysis'
    Imberger, Georgina
    Gluud, Christian
    Wetterslev, Jorn
    [J]. STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2011, 30 (24) : 2965 - 2966
  • [30] Random-effects meta-analysis: the number of studies matters
    Guolo, Annamaria
    Varin, Cristiano
    [J]. STATISTICAL METHODS IN MEDICAL RESEARCH, 2017, 26 (03) : 1500 - 1518