Literature DB >> 24679936

Quantifying veterinarians' beliefs on disease control and exploring the effect of new evidence: a Bayesian approach.

H M Higgins1, J N Huxley2, W Wapenaar2, M J Green2.   

Abstract

The clinical beliefs (expectations and demands) of veterinarians regarding herd-level strategies to control mastitis, lameness, and Johne's disease were quantified in a numerical format; 94 veterinarians working in England (UK) were randomly selected and, during interviews, a statistical technique called probabilistic elicitation was used to capture their clinical expectations as probability distributions. The results revealed that markedly different clinical expectations existed for all 3 diseases, and many pairs of veterinarians had expectations with nonoverlapping 95% Bayesian credible intervals. For example, for a 3-yr lameness intervention, the most pessimistic veterinarian was centered at an 11% population mean reduction in lameness prevalence (95% credible interval: 0-21%); the most enthusiastic veterinarian was centered at a 58% reduction (95% credible interval: 38-78%). This suggests that a major change in beliefs would be required to achieve clinical agreement. Veterinarians' clinical expectations were used as priors in Bayesian models where they were combined with synthetic data (from randomized clinical trials of different sizes) to explore the effect of new evidence on current clinical opinion. The mathematical models make predictions based on the assumption that veterinarians will update their beliefs logically. For example, for the lameness intervention, a 200-farm clinical trial that estimated a 30% mean reduction in lameness prevalence was predicted to be reasonably convincing to the most pessimist veterinarian; that is, in light of this data, they were predicted to believe there would be a 0.92 probability of exceeding the median clinical demand of this sample of veterinarians, which was a 20% mean reduction in lameness. Currently, controversy exists over the extent to which veterinarians update their beliefs logically, and further research on this is needed. This study has demonstrated that probabilistic elicitation and a Bayesian framework are useful for evaluating the diversity and strength of veterinarians' clinical beliefs. The wide variations observed have implications for designing future projects. Although many factors influence disease control, nonetheless the heterogeneity in beliefs also raises concern over the extent to which a broadly consistent approach is currently being achieved; it supports the argument for more randomized clinical trials and for national programs to control nonstatutory endemic diseases.
Copyright © 2014 American Dairy Science Association. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Bayesian updating; clinical belief; evidence-based medicine; probabilistic elicitation

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24679936      PMCID: PMC5490737          DOI: 10.3168/jds.2013-7087

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Dairy Sci        ISSN: 0022-0302            Impact factor:   4.034


  6 in total

1.  Simple tools for understanding risks: from innumeracy to insight.

Authors:  Gerd Gigerenzer; Adrian Edwards
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2003-09-27

2.  National intervention study of mastitis control in dairy herds in England and Wales.

Authors:  M J Green; K A Leach; J E Breen; L E Green; A J Bradley
Journal:  Vet Rec       Date:  2007-03-03       Impact factor: 2.695

3.  Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases.

Authors:  A Tversky; D Kahneman
Journal:  Science       Date:  1974-09-27       Impact factor: 47.728

4.  Significance testing as perverse probabilistic reasoning.

Authors:  M Brandon Westover; Kenneth D Westover; Matt T Bianchi
Journal:  BMC Med       Date:  2011-02-28       Impact factor: 8.775

5.  The CHART trials: Bayesian design and monitoring in practice. CHART Steering Committee.

Authors:  M K Parmar; D J Spiegelhalter; L S Freedman
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1994 Jul 15-30       Impact factor: 2.373

6.  Bayesian analysis of a mastitis control plan to investigate the influence of veterinary prior beliefs on clinical interpretation.

Authors:  M J Green; W J Browne; L E Green; A J Bradley; K A Leach; J E Breen; G F Medley
Journal:  Prev Vet Med       Date:  2009-07-02       Impact factor: 2.670

  6 in total
  3 in total

1.  Preparation of Honeycomb-Structured Activated Carbon-Zeolite Composites from Modified Fly Ash and the Adsorptive Removal of Pb(II).

Authors:  Mengqi Zhao; Xiaoqing Ma; Dejun Chen; Yinnian Liao
Journal:  ACS Omega       Date:  2022-03-10

2.  An extended multi-criteria group decision-making method with psychological factors and bidirectional influence relation for emergency medical supplier selection.

Authors:  Sen Liu; Xiaojun He; Felix T S Chan; Zhiyong Wang
Journal:  Expert Syst Appl       Date:  2022-04-28       Impact factor: 8.665

3.  Respective influence of veterinarians and local institutional stakeholders on the event-driven surveillance system for bovine brucellosis in France.

Authors:  Anne Bronner; Eric Morignat; Didier Calavas
Journal:  BMC Vet Res       Date:  2015-08-01       Impact factor: 2.741

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.