ArticleTranslational vision science & technology2024
Using Hierarchical Bayesian Modeling to Enhance Statistical Inference on Contrast Sensitivity.
Article in Translational vision science & technology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Pyramid-based Bayesian modeling for high-resolution behavioral analysis.Journal of vision · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this study is to introduce a nonparametric hierarchical Bayesian model (HBM) that enables advanced statistical inference on contrast sensitivity (CS) both at individual spatial frequencies (SFs) and across multiple SFs in clinical trials, where CS measurements are crucial for assessing safety and efficacy. Methods: The HBM computes the joint posterior distribution of CS at six Food and Drug Administration-designated SFs across the population, individual, and test levels. It incorporates covariances at both population and individual levels to capture the relationship between CSs across SFs. A Bayesian inference procedure (BIP) is also used to estimate the posterior distribution of CS at each SF independently. Both methods are applied to a quantitative CSF (qCSF) dataset of 112 subjects and compared in terms of precision, test-retest reliability of CS estimates, sensitivity, accuracy, and statistical power in detecting CS changes. Results: The HBM reveals correlations between CSs in pairs of SFs and provides significantly more precise estimates and higher test-retest reliability compared to the BIP. Additionally, it improves the average sensitivity and accuracy in detecting CS changes for individual subjects, as well as statistical power for detecting group-level CS changes at individual and combinations of multiple SFs between luminance conditions. Conclusions: The HBM establishes a comprehensive framework to enhance sensitivity, accuracy, and statistical power for detecting CS changes in hierarchical experimental designs. Translational Relevance: The HBM presents a valuable tool for advancing CS assessments in the clinic and clinical trials, potentially improving the evaluation of treatment efficacy and patient outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.