Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2022 Feb 1.
Published in final edited form as: Lancet Respir Med. 2020 Nov 20;9(2):207–216. doi: 10.1016/S2213-2600(20)30471-9

Table 1.

Bayesian analysis of critical care trials classified according to frequentist analysis across a range of posterior probability thresholds for clinical benefit

Treatment effect Prior
distribution
Posterior
probability of
treatment effect
Outcome of frequentist analysis
Positive (4) Negative or
indeterminate (78)
MCID Skeptical > 90% 1 (25%) 0 (0%)
> 75% 2 (50%) 2 (3%)
> 50% 2 (50%) 7 (9%)
Uninformative > 90% 2 (50%) 1 (1%)
> 75% 2 (50%) 7 (9%)
> 50% 2 (50%) 12 (15%)
Enthusiastic > 90% 2 (50%) 2 (3%)
> 75% 2 (50%) 7 (9%)
> 50% 2 (50%) 19 (24%)
Any benefit (ARR>0) Skeptical > 50% 4 (100%) 36 (46%)
> 90% 4 (100%) 3 (4%)
Uninformative > 50% 4 (100%) 36 (46%)
> 90% 4 (100%) 7 (9%)
Enthusiastic > 50% 4 (100%) 61 (78%)
> 90% 4 (100%) 18 (23%)
Planned effect Skeptical > 50% 0 (0%) 0 (0%)
Uninformative > 50% 1 (25%) 0 (0%)
Enthusiastic > 50% 0 (0%) 1 (1%)

MCID = Minimum clinically important difference

ARR = Absolute risk reduction

This table shows the number and percentage of studies according to frequentist classification (fourth and fifth columns) where the posterior probability of achieving clinical benefit (defined by first column) according to each prior (second column) is greater than the posterior probability threshold (third column). For example, among studies classified as negative by frequentist criteria there are zero studies where the posterior probability of clinical benefit exceeds 90% using the skeptical prior distribution and the MCID as the threshold for clinical benefit.