Exposure models for the prior distribution in bayesian decision analysis for occupational hygiene decision making.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Lee EG
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4665102 | biostudies-literature | 2013
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Exposure models for the prior distribution in bayesian decision analysis for occupational hygiene decision making.
Lee Eun Gyung EG Kim Seung Won SW Feigley Charles E CE Harper Martin M
Journal of occupational and environmental hygiene 20130101 2
This study introduces two semi-quantitative methods, Structured Subjective Assessment (SSA) and Control of Substances Hazardous to Health (COSHH) Essentials, in conjunction with two-dimensional Monte Carlo simulations for determining prior probabilities. Prior distribution using expert judgment was included for comparison. Practical applications of the proposed methods were demonstrated using personal exposure measurements of isoamyl acetate in an electronics manufacturing facility and of isopro ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:In meta-analysis, the structure of the between-sample heterogeneity plays a crucial role in estimating the meta-parameter. A Bayesian meta-analysis for binary data has recently been proposed that measures this heterogeneity by clustering the samples and then determining the posterior probability of the cluster models through model selection. The meta-parameter is then estimated using Bayesian model averaging techniques. Although an objective Bayesian meta-analysis is proposed for each type of heterogeneity, we concentrate the attention of this paper on priors over the models. We consider four alternative priors which are motivated by reasonable but different assumptions. A frequentist validation with simulated data has been carried out to analyze the properties of each prior distribution for a set of different number of studies and sample sizes. The results show the importance of choosing an adequate model prior as the posterior probabilities for the models are very sensitive to it. The hierarchical Poisson prior and the hierarchical uniform prior show a good performance when the real model is the homogeneity, or when the sample sizes are high enough. However, the uniform prior can detect the true model when it is an intermediate model (neither homogeneity nor heterogeneity) even for small sample sizes and few studies. An illustrative example with real data is also given, showing the sensitivity of the estimation of the meta-parameter to the model prior.
| S-EPMC7832911 | biostudies-literature
Project description:A rich body of empirical work has addressed the question of how stress changes the way we memorize, learn, and make high-level decisions in complex scenarios. There is evidence that stress also changes the way we perceive the world, indicating influences on decision-making at lower levels. Surprisingly, as of yet, little research has been conducted in this domain. A few studies suggest that under stress, humans tend to eschew existing knowledge, and instead focus on novel input or information from bottom-up. Decision-making in the perceptual domain has been modeled with Bayesian frameworks. Here, existing knowledge about structures and statistics of our environment is referred to as prior, whereas sensory data are termed likelihood. In this study, we directly assessed whether stress, as induced by the socially evaluated cold pressure task (SECPT), would modulate low-level decisions, specifically the weight given to sensory information, and how people reacted to changes in prior and sensory uncertainty. We found that while the stress-inducing procedure successfully elicited subjective stress ratings as well as stress relevant physiological paramters, it did not change participants' average reliance on sensory information. Furthermore, it did not affect participants' sensitivity to changes in prior and sensory uncertainty, with both groups able to detect it and modulate their behavior accordingly, in a way predicted by Bayesian statistics. Our results suggest that, contrary to our predictions, stress may not directly affect lower-level sensory-motor decisions. We discuss the findings in context of time scales of the stress reaction, linked to different neural and functional consequences.
| S-EPMC7722735 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In this paper, we present a generic approach that can be used to infer how subjects make optimal decisions under uncertainty. This approach induces a distinction between a subject's perceptual model, which underlies the representation of a hidden "state of affairs" and a response model, which predicts the ensuing behavioural (or neurophysiological) responses to those inputs. We start with the premise that subjects continuously update a probabilistic representation of the causes of their sensory inputs to optimise their behaviour. In addition, subjects have preferences or goals that guide decisions about actions given the above uncertain representation of these hidden causes or state of affairs. From a Bayesian decision theoretic perspective, uncertain representations are so-called "posterior" beliefs, which are influenced by subjective "prior" beliefs. Preferences and goals are encoded through a "loss" (or "utility") function, which measures the cost incurred by making any admissible decision for any given (hidden) state of affair. By assuming that subjects make optimal decisions on the basis of updated (posterior) beliefs and utility (loss) functions, one can evaluate the likelihood of observed behaviour. Critically, this enables one to "observe the observer", i.e. identify (context- or subject-dependent) prior beliefs and utility-functions using psychophysical or neurophysiological measures. In this paper, we describe the main theoretical components of this meta-Bayesian approach (i.e. a Bayesian treatment of Bayesian decision theoretic predictions). In a companion paper ('Observing the observer (II): deciding when to decide'), we describe a concrete implementation of it and demonstrate its utility by applying it to simulated and real reaction time data from an associative learning task.
| S-EPMC3001878 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Humans stand out from other animals in that they are able to explicitly report on the reliability of their internal operations. This ability, which is known as metacognition, is typically studied by asking people to report their confidence in the correctness of some decision. However, the computations underlying confidence reports remain unclear. In this paper, we present a fully Bayesian method for directly comparing models of confidence. Using a visual two-interval forced-choice task, we tested whether confidence reports reflect heuristic computations (e.g. the magnitude of sensory data) or Bayes optimal ones (i.e. how likely a decision is to be correct given the sensory data). In a standard design in which subjects were first asked to make a decision, and only then gave their confidence, subjects were mostly Bayes optimal. In contrast, in a less-commonly used design in which subjects indicated their confidence and decision simultaneously, they were roughly equally likely to use the Bayes optimal strategy or to use a heuristic but suboptimal strategy. Our results suggest that, while people's confidence reports can reflect Bayes optimal computations, even a small unusual twist or additional element of complexity can prevent optimality.
| S-EPMC4627723 | biostudies-literature
Project description:When making a decision, one must first accumulate evidence, often over time, and then select the appropriate action. Here, we present a neural model of decision making that can perform both evidence accumulation and action selection optimally. More specifically, we show that, given a Poisson-like distribution of spike counts, biological neural networks can accumulate evidence without loss of information through linear integration of neural activity and can select the most likely action through attractor dynamics. This holds for arbitrary correlations, any tuning curves, continuous and discrete variables, and sensory evidence whose reliability varies over time. Our model predicts that the neurons in the lateral intraparietal cortex involved in evidence accumulation encode, on every trial, a probability distribution which predicts the animal's performance. We present experimental evidence consistent with this prediction and discuss other predictions applicable to more general settings.
| S-EPMC2742921 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesPrior authorization (PA) aims to promote the safe and effective use of medications and to control costs. However, PA-related administrative tasks can contribute to burden on health care providers. This study examines how such tasks affect treatment decisions.Study designCross-sectional, online survey.MethodsWe conducted an online survey of US medical providers in 2020 based on a convenience sample of 100,000 providers. Multivariate path analysis was used to examine associations among provider practice characteristics, step therapy and other health plan requirements, perceived burdens of PA, communication issues with insurers, and prescribing behaviors (prescribing a different medication than planned, avoiding prescribing of newer medications even if evidence-based guideline recommendations are met, and modifying a diagnosis). Weighted analyses were conducted to assess nonresponse bias.ResultsA total of 1173 respondents (1.2% response rate) provided 1147 usable surveys. Step therapy requirements had the largest effect on clinical decision-making. Other significant effects on clinical decision-making included perceived PA likelihood, communication issues, and health plan requirements (eg, clinical documentation). Weighted analyses showed that the study conclusions were unlikely to have been biased by nonresponse.ConclusionsRespondents report that they may alter clinical decisions to avoid PA requirements and related burdens, even in cases in which use of the PA medication was clinically appropriate. Processes that reduce the administrative burden of PA through improved communication and transparency as well as standardized documentation may help ensure that PA more seamlessly achieves its goals of safe and effective use of medications.
| S-EPMC10403277 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundLASSO is a penalized regression method that facilitates model fitting in situations where there are as many, or even more explanatory variables than observations, and only a few variables are relevant in explaining the data. We focus on the Bayesian version of LASSO and consider four problems that need special attention: (i) controlling false positives, (ii) multiple comparisons, (iii) collinearity among explanatory variables, and (iv) the choice of the tuning parameter that controls the amount of shrinkage and the sparsity of the estimates. The particular application considered is association genetics, where LASSO regression can be used to find links between chromosome locations and phenotypic traits in a biological organism. However, the proposed techniques are relevant also in other contexts where LASSO is used for variable selection.ResultsWe separate the true associations from false positives using the posterior distribution of the effects (regression coefficients) provided by Bayesian LASSO. We propose to solve the multiple comparisons problem by using simultaneous inference based on the joint posterior distribution of the effects. Bayesian LASSO also tends to distribute an effect among collinear variables, making detection of an association difficult. We propose to solve this problem by considering not only individual effects but also their functionals (i.e. sums and differences). Finally, whereas in Bayesian LASSO the tuning parameter is often regarded as a random variable, we adopt a scale space view and consider a whole range of fixed tuning parameters, instead. The effect estimates and the associated inference are considered for all tuning parameters in the selected range and the results are visualized with color maps that provide useful insights into data and the association problem considered. The methods are illustrated using two sets of artificial data and one real data set, all representing typical settings in association genetics.
| S-EPMC4391919 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Bayesian inference suggests that perception is inferred from a weighted integration of prior contextual beliefs with current sensory evidence (likelihood) about the world around us. The perceived precision or uncertainty associated with prior and likelihood information is used to guide perceptual decision-making, such that more weight is placed on the source of information with greater precision. This provides a framework for understanding a spectrum of clinical transdiagnostic symptoms associated with aberrant perception, as well as individual differences in the general population. While behavioral paradigms are commonly used to characterize individual differences in perception as a stable characteristic, measurement reliability in these behavioral tasks is rarely assessed. To remedy this gap, we empirically evaluate the reliability of a perceptual decision-making task that quantifies individual differences in Bayesian belief updating in terms of the relative precision weighting afforded to prior and likelihood information (i.e., sensory weight). We analyzed data from participants (n = 37) who performed this task twice. We found that the precision afforded to prior and likelihood information showed high internal consistency and good test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.73, 95% CI [0.53, 0.85]) when averaged across participants, as well as at the individual level using hierarchical modeling. Our results provide support for the assumption that Bayesian belief updating operates as a stable characteristic in perceptual decision-making. We discuss the utility and applicability of reliable perceptual decision-making paradigms as a measure of individual differences in the general population, as well as a diagnostic tool in psychiatric research.
| S-EPMC11335944 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Although classical decision-making studies have assumed that subjects behave in a Bayes-optimal way, the sub-optimality that causes biases in decision-making is currently under debate. Here, we propose a synthesis based on exponentially-biased Bayesian inference, including various decision-making and probability judgments with different bias levels. We arrange three major parameter estimation methods in a two-dimensional bias parameter space (prior and likelihood), of the biased Bayesian inference. Then, we discuss a neural implementation of the biased Bayesian inference on the basis of changes in weights in neural connections, which we regarded as a combination of leaky/unstable neural integrator and probabilistic population coding. Finally, we discuss mechanisms of cognitive control which may regulate the bias levels.
| S-EPMC6195105 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundStatistical inference based on small datasets, commonly found in precision oncology, is subject to low power and high uncertainty. In these settings, drawing strong conclusions about future research utility is difficult when using standard inferential measures. It is therefore important to better quantify the uncertainty associated with both significant and non-significant results based on small sample sizes.MethodsWe developed a new method, Bayesian Additional Evidence (BAE), that determines (1) how much additional supportive evidence is needed for a non-significant result to reach Bayesian posterior credibility, or (2) how much additional opposing evidence is needed to render a significant result non-credible. Although based in Bayesian analysis, a prior distribution is not needed; instead, the tipping point output is compared to reasonable effect ranges to draw conclusions. We demonstrate our approach in a comparative effectiveness analysis comparing two treatments in a real world biomarker-defined cohort, and provide guidelines for how to apply BAE in practice.ResultsOur initial comparative effectiveness analysis results in a hazard ratio of 0.31 with 95% confidence interval (0.09, 1.1). Applying BAE to this result yields a tipping point of 0.54; thus, an observed hazard ratio of 0.54 or smaller in a replication study would result in posterior credibility for the treatment association. Given that effect sizes in this range are not extreme, and that supportive evidence exists from a similar published study, we conclude that this problem is worthy of further research.ConclusionsOur proposed method provides a useful framework for interpreting analytic results from small datasets. This can assist researchers in deciding how to interpret and continue their investigations based on an initial analysis that has high uncertainty. Although we illustrated its use in estimating parameters based on time-to-event outcomes, BAE easily applies to any normally-distributed estimator, such as those used for analyzing binary or continuous outcomes.
| S-EPMC8543928 | biostudies-literature