METHODS: We propose a Bayesian joint modelling approach to determine mortality due to cognitive impairment via repeated measures of 3MS scores trajectories over a 21-year follow-up period. Data for this study are taken from the Osteoporotic Fracture longitudinal study among women aged 65+ which started in 1986-88.
RESULTS: The standard relative risk model from the analyses with a baseline 3MS score after adjusting for all the significant covariates demonstrates that, every unit decrease in a 3MS score corresponds to a non-significant 1.059 increase risk of mortality with a 95% CI of (0.981, 1.143), while the extended model results in a significant 0.09% increased risk in mortality. The joint modelling approach found a strong association between the 3MS scores and the risk of mortality, such that, every unit decrease in 3MS scores results in a 1.135 (13%) increased risk of death via cognitive impairment with a 95% CI of (1.056, 1.215).
CONCLUSION: It has been demonstrated that a decrease in 3MS results has a significant increase risk of mortality due to cognitive impairment via joint modelling, but insignificant when considered under the standard relative risk approach.
METHODS: This protocol was drafted in agreement with the ROBUST-statement, and is submitted for publication before database lock and primary data analysis. The primary outcome is health-related quality of life as measured by the EQ-5D-5L health utility score and is longitudinally assessed. Secondary outcomes comprise the 6-min walking test and handgrip strength over the entire follow-up period (longitudinal analyses), and 60-day mortality, duration of mechanical ventilation, and EQ-5D-5L health utility scores at 30, 90 and 180 days (cross-sectional). All analyses will primarily be performed under weakly informative priors. When available, informative priors elicited from contemporary literature will also be incorporated under alternative scenarios. In all other cases, objectively formulated skeptical and enthusiastic priors will be defined to assess the robustness of our results. Relevant identified subgroups were: patients with acute kidney injury, severe multi-organ failure and patients with or without sepsis. Results will be presented as absolute risk differences, mean differences, and odds ratios, with accompanying 95% credible intervals. Posterior probabilities will be estimated for clinically important benefit and harm.
DISCUSSION: The proposed secondary, pre-planned Bayesian analysis of the PRECISe trial will provide additional information on the effects of high protein on functional and clinical outcomes in critically ill patients, such as probabilistic interpretation, probabilities of clinically important effect sizes, and the integration of prior evidence. As such, it will complement the interpretation of the primary outcome as well as several secondary and subgroup analyses.
METHODS: The development data set comprised 138,309 women from 17 case-control studies. PRSs were generated using a clumping and thresholding method, lasso penalized regression, an Empirical Bayes approach, a Bayesian polygenic prediction approach, or linear combinations of multiple PRSs. These PRSs were evaluated in 89,898 women from 3 prospective studies (1592 incident cases).
RESULTS: The best performing PRS (genome-wide set of single-nucleotide variations [formerly single-nucleotide polymorphism]) had a hazard ratio per unit SD of 1.62 (95% CI = 1.46-1.80) and an area under the receiver operating curve of 0.635 (95% CI = 0.622-0.649). Combined Asian and European PRSs (333 single-nucleotide variations) had a hazard ratio per SD of 1.53 (95% CI = 1.37-1.71) and an area under the receiver operating curve of 0.621 (95% CI = 0.608-0.635). The distribution of the latter PRS was different across ethnic subgroups, confirming the importance of population-specific calibration for valid estimation of breast cancer risk.
CONCLUSION: PRSs developed in this study, from association data from multiple ancestries, can enhance risk stratification for women of Asian ancestry.
METHODS: Such activity is recorded through various neuroimaging techniques like fMRI, EEG, MEG etc. EEG signals based localization is termed as EEG source localization. The source localization problem is defined by two complementary problems; the forward problem and the inverse problem. The forward problem involves the modeling how the electromagnetic sources cause measurement in sensor space, while the inverse problem refers to the estimation of the sources (causes) from observed data (consequences). Usually, this inverse problem is ill-posed. In other words, there are many solutions to the inverse problem that explains the same data. This ill-posed problem can be finessed by using prior information within a Bayesian framework. This research work discusses source reconstruction for EEG data using a Bayesian framework. In particular, MSP, LORETA and MNE are compared.
RESULTS: The results are compared in terms of variational free energy approximation to model evidence and in terms of variance accounted for in the sensor space. The results are taken for real time EEG data and synthetically generated EEG data at an SNR level of 10dB.
CONCLUSION: In brief, it was seen that MSP has the highest evidence and lowest localization error when compared to classical models. Furthermore, the plausibility and consistency of the source reconstruction speaks to the ability of MSP technique to localize active brain sources.