British journal of anaesthesia
-
Comment Review
Theory and practical use of Bayesian methods in interpreting clinical trial data: a narrative review.
The critical reading of scientific articles is necessary for the daily practice of evidence-based medicine. Rigorous comprehension of statistical methods is essential, as reflected by the extensive use of statistics in the biomedical literature. In contrast to the customary frequentist approach, which never uses or gives the probability of a hypothesis, Bayesian theory uses probabilities for both hypotheses and data. ⋯ The aim of this review is to compare general Bayesian concepts with frequentist methods to facilitate a better understanding of Bayesian theory for readers who are not familiar with this approach. The review is intended to be used in combination with a checklist we have devised for reading reports analysed by Bayesian methods. We compare and contrast the different approaches of Bayesian vs frequentist statistical methods by considering data from a clinical trial that lends itself to this comparative approach.
-
In the context of an increasing number of publications of trial data analysed by Bayesian methods, clinicians need support to better understand Bayesian statistical methods. The existing checklists are intended for people who already know these methods. We aimed to establish and validate a checklist that contains a group of items considered crucial in interpreting the results of a phase III RCT analysed with Bayesian methods. ⋯ The checklist can help clinicians interpret the results of a phase III randomised clinical trial analysed by Bayesian methods, even clinicians with no particular knowledge of statistics, to ensure that the major elements of the statistical section are present and valid. Care should be taken in interpreting the results of a trial analysed by Bayesian methods that are not reported with these three essential items because the validity of the results cannot be established.
-
Gabapentinoid drugs (gabapentin and pregabalin) are effective in neuropathic pain, which has a prevalence of ∼7%. Concerns about increased prescribing have implications for patient safety, misuse, and diversion. Drug-related deaths (DRDs) have increased and toxicology often implicates gabapentinoids. We studied national and regional prescribing rates (2006-2016) and identified associated sociodemographic factors, co-prescriptions and mortality, including DRDs. ⋯ Gabapentinoid prescribing has increased dramatically since 2006, as have dangerous co-prescribing and death (including DRDs). Older people, women, and those living in deprived areas were particularly likely to receive prescriptions. Their contribution to DRDs may be more related to illegal use with diversion of prescribed medication.