Statistical Science

Biostatistics and Bayes

Norman Breslow

Full-text: Open access

Abstract

Attitudes of biostatisticians toward implementation of the Bayesian paradigm have changed during the past decade due to the increased availability of computational tools for realistic problems. Empirical Bayes' methods, already widely used in the analysis of longitudinal data, promise to improve cancer incidence maps by accounting for overdispersion and spatial correlation. Hierarchical Bayes' methods offer a natural framework in which to demonstrate the bioequivalence of pharmacologic compounds. Their use for quantitative risk assessment and carcinogenesis bioassay is more controversial, however, due to uncertainty regarding specification of informative priors. Bayesian methods simplify the analysis of data from sequential clinical trials and avoid certain paradoxes of frequentist inference. They offer a natural setting for the synthesis of expert opinion in deciding policy matters. Both frequentist and Bayes' methods have a place in biostatistical practice.

Article information

Source
Statist. Sci., Volume 5, Number 3 (1990), 269-284.

Dates
First available in Project Euclid: 19 April 2007

Permanent link to this document
https://projecteuclid.org/euclid.ss/1177012092

Digital Object Identifier
doi:10.1214/ss/1177012092

Mathematical Reviews number (MathSciNet)
MR1080953

Zentralblatt MATH identifier
0955.62639

JSTOR
links.jstor.org

Keywords
Bioequivalence sequential clinical trials longitudinal data model uncertainty multiple comparisons risk assessment

Citation

Breslow, Norman. Biostatistics and Bayes. Statist. Sci. 5 (1990), no. 3, 269--284. doi:10.1214/ss/1177012092. https://projecteuclid.org/euclid.ss/1177012092


Export citation

See also

  • See Comment: Peter Armitage. [Biostatistics and Bayes]: Comment. Statist. Sci., Volume 5, Number 3 (1990), 284--286.
  • See Comment: H. Fluhler. [Biostatistics and Bayes]: Comment. Statist. Sci., Volume 5, Number 3 (1990), 286--287.
  • See Comment: C. Jennison. [Biostatistics and Bayes]: Comment. Statist. Sci., Volume 5, Number 3 (1990), 288--291.
  • See Comment: David J. Spiegelhalter, Laurence S. Freedman. [Biostatistics and Bayes]: Comment. Statist. Sci., Volume 5, Number 3 (1990), 292--294.
  • See Comment: M. Zelen. [Biostatistics and Bayes]: Comment. Statist. Sci., Volume 5, Number 3 (1990), 294--295.
  • See Comment: Norman Breslow. [Biostatistics and Bayes]: Rejoinder. Statist. Sci., Volume 5, Number 3 (1990), 295--298.