Cited by 383Statistical Methods and Bayesian InferenceStatistical Methods in EpidemiologyAdvanced Causal Inference Techniques

Bayesian perspectives for epidemiological research: I. Foundations and basic methods

Greenland, Sander·2006·International Journal of Epidemiology

Abstract

One misconception (of many) about Bayesian analyses is that prior distributions introduce assumptions that are more questionable than assumptions made by frequentist methods; yet the assumptions in priors can be more reasonable than the assumptions implicit in standard frequentist models. Another misconception is that Bayesian methods are computationally difficult and require special software. But perfectly adequate Bayesian analyses can be carried out with common software for frequentist analysis. Under a wide range of priors, the accuracy of these approximations is just as good as the frequentist accuracy of the software--and more than adequate for the inaccurate observational studies found in health and social sciences. An easy way to do Bayesian analyses is via inverse-variance (information) weighted averaging of the prior with the frequentist estimate. A more general method expresses the prior distributions in the form of prior data or 'data equivalents', which are then entered in the analysis as a new data stratum. That form reveals the strength of the prior judgements being introduced and may lead to tempering of those judgements. It is argued that a criterion for scientific acceptability of a prior distribution is that it be expressible as prior data, so that the strength of prior assumptions can be gauged by how much data they represent.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/ije/dyi312

Cites

60 of 60 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Greenland, S.
Affiliations
University of California, Los Angeles (US)
Corresponding author
Greenland, Sander
Venue
International Journal of Epidemiology
Published
2006-01-30
Volume
35
Issue
3
Pages
765-775
ISSN
  • 0300-5771 (ISSN-L)
  • 1464-3685
OpenAlex
W2122905005
Cited by
383
References
60
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 43 · 2019: 52 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 16 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 30 · 2012: 15
FWCI
16.24
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • International Journal of Epidemiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Epidemiology
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Advanced Causal Inference Techniques
Keywords
Bayesian analysis, prior distributions, inverse variance weighting, observational studies, prior assumptions, epidemiological studies
MeSH terms
Bayes Theorem, Data Interpretation, Statistical, Epidemiologic Methods, Research Design, Reproducibility of Results, Risk Assessment

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review