Bayesian meta-analysis in the 21st century: Fad or future of evidence synthesis?

Meta-analyses are pivotal in evidence-based medicine. They synthesise findings from multiple studies to inform clinical practice. Traditionally, frequentist statistical methods have dominated this field. However, growing recognition of their limitations in interpreting uncertainty and integrating p...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Shruthi C Iyer, Qai Ven Yap, John Soong, Matthew Cove
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Academy of Medicine Singapore 2025-07-01
Series:Annals, Academy of Medicine, Singapore
Online Access:https://annals.edu.sg/bayesian-meta-analysis-in-the-21st-century-fad-or-future-of-evidence-synthesis/
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1849243346070929408
author Shruthi C Iyer
Qai Ven Yap
John Soong
Matthew Cove
author_facet Shruthi C Iyer
Qai Ven Yap
John Soong
Matthew Cove
author_sort Shruthi C Iyer
collection DOAJ
description Meta-analyses are pivotal in evidence-based medicine. They synthesise findings from multiple studies to inform clinical practice. Traditionally, frequentist statistical methods have dominated this field. However, growing recognition of their limitations in interpreting uncertainty and integrating prior knowledge has led to increased interest in Bayesian methods. We compared the Bayesian and frequentist approaches to meta-analysis, assessed their respective strengths and limitations, and evaluated how each technique influences the interpretation of clinical trial data, particularly when evidence is ambiguous. A narrative review was conducted to understand and compare key aspects of frequentist and Bayesian statistics. Real-world clinical examples were used to illustrate the differences between how each statistical paradigm interprets the same dataset. Frequentist methods were assessed based on null hypothesis testing and P values, while Bayesian methods were evaluated for their use of prior distributions and posterior probabilities. We demonstrated how statistical significance of the obtained result may differ based on whether a frequentist or Bayesian statistical analysis was employed. In most cases, Bayesian methods enabled increased intuitiveness and flexibility of interpretations by incorporating uncertainty and pre-existing evidence. While frequentist methods remain standard for simpler univariate analyses, the Bayesian approach offers a more holistic framework for complex meta-analyses, as it aligns more closely with practical clinical decision-making. This places Bayesian inference a valuable tool in the future of evidence synthesis.
format Article
id doaj-art-89ed59f451a841048dcaf2575ffabd67
institution Kabale University
issn 2972-4066
language English
publishDate 2025-07-01
publisher Academy of Medicine Singapore
record_format Article
series Annals, Academy of Medicine, Singapore
spelling doaj-art-89ed59f451a841048dcaf2575ffabd672025-08-20T03:59:31ZengAcademy of Medicine SingaporeAnnals, Academy of Medicine, Singapore2972-40662025-07-0154743710.47102/annals-acadmedsg.2025104Bayesian meta-analysis in the 21st century: Fad or future of evidence synthesis?Shruthi C Iyerhttps://orcid.org/0009-0004-3600-1459Qai Ven YapJohn Soonghttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-4235-8505Matthew Covehttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-3805-4680 Meta-analyses are pivotal in evidence-based medicine. They synthesise findings from multiple studies to inform clinical practice. Traditionally, frequentist statistical methods have dominated this field. However, growing recognition of their limitations in interpreting uncertainty and integrating prior knowledge has led to increased interest in Bayesian methods. We compared the Bayesian and frequentist approaches to meta-analysis, assessed their respective strengths and limitations, and evaluated how each technique influences the interpretation of clinical trial data, particularly when evidence is ambiguous. A narrative review was conducted to understand and compare key aspects of frequentist and Bayesian statistics. Real-world clinical examples were used to illustrate the differences between how each statistical paradigm interprets the same dataset. Frequentist methods were assessed based on null hypothesis testing and P values, while Bayesian methods were evaluated for their use of prior distributions and posterior probabilities. We demonstrated how statistical significance of the obtained result may differ based on whether a frequentist or Bayesian statistical analysis was employed. In most cases, Bayesian methods enabled increased intuitiveness and flexibility of interpretations by incorporating uncertainty and pre-existing evidence. While frequentist methods remain standard for simpler univariate analyses, the Bayesian approach offers a more holistic framework for complex meta-analyses, as it aligns more closely with practical clinical decision-making. This places Bayesian inference a valuable tool in the future of evidence synthesis.https://annals.edu.sg/bayesian-meta-analysis-in-the-21st-century-fad-or-future-of-evidence-synthesis/
spellingShingle Shruthi C Iyer
Qai Ven Yap
John Soong
Matthew Cove
Bayesian meta-analysis in the 21st century: Fad or future of evidence synthesis?
Annals, Academy of Medicine, Singapore
title Bayesian meta-analysis in the 21st century: Fad or future of evidence synthesis?
title_full Bayesian meta-analysis in the 21st century: Fad or future of evidence synthesis?
title_fullStr Bayesian meta-analysis in the 21st century: Fad or future of evidence synthesis?
title_full_unstemmed Bayesian meta-analysis in the 21st century: Fad or future of evidence synthesis?
title_short Bayesian meta-analysis in the 21st century: Fad or future of evidence synthesis?
title_sort bayesian meta analysis in the 21st century fad or future of evidence synthesis
url https://annals.edu.sg/bayesian-meta-analysis-in-the-21st-century-fad-or-future-of-evidence-synthesis/
work_keys_str_mv AT shruthiciyer bayesianmetaanalysisinthe21stcenturyfadorfutureofevidencesynthesis
AT qaivenyap bayesianmetaanalysisinthe21stcenturyfadorfutureofevidencesynthesis
AT johnsoong bayesianmetaanalysisinthe21stcenturyfadorfutureofevidencesynthesis
AT matthewcove bayesianmetaanalysisinthe21stcenturyfadorfutureofevidencesynthesis