To demonstrate a worked-out example of a Bayesian independent t-test using open-source software, simulated data, a hypothetical nurse education intervention and a randomised controlled study design. This tutorial explains relevant Bayesian concepts and highlights literature that provides statistically principled justifications for replacing or complementing the frequentist independent t-test with its Bayesian counterpart.
Bayesian t-test analysis tutorial.
A pedagogical framework was applied.
Simulated data generated in Microsoft Excel was uploaded to the Open Science Framework, accessible at: osf.io/4t9gn.
The Bayesian independent t-test in JASP provides: (1) a Bayes factor quantifying the relative evidence for determining which of two competing theories, that is, the null (H0) or the alternative (H1) hypotheses, better supports the experimental data and (2) the posterior probability distribution, with its median point estimate plus a 95% credible interval, quantifying the magnitude and uncertainty of the effect size estimate.
This article provides a practical method for nursing and midwifery researchers to conduct Bayesian analysis, offering statistical, practical and ethical advantages, including the application of sequential analysis and optimal stopping rules enhancing research efficiency.
This article increases awareness of the feasibility and benefits of Bayesian analysis in nursing and midwifery research, emphasising its ease of implementation through open-source software. Clear step-by-step guidance is provided to support its wider adoption and strengthen methodological rigour in nursing and midwifery research.
Nursing and midwifery research has traditionally relied upon frequentist statistical techniques, based on p values and confidence intervals. Bayesian methods can: (a) improve nursing and midwifery decision-making with probabilistic evidence and (b) reduce publication bias by avoiding binary interpretation of research results.
The methodology aligns with van Doorn et al. (2021) guidelines for conducting and reporting a Bayesian analysis.
No patient or public contribution.
To identify barriers and facilitators to implementing an electronic shared decision-making tool for managing anticoagulant-related drug-drug interactions that affect bleeding risk in routine clinical care.
Preimplementation qualitative study using semistructured interviews.
Three academic medical centres in the southeastern and western USA. Interviews were conducted between 27 March and 25 September 2024.
36 participants, including 19 clinicians involved in prescribing or managing anticoagulants and seventeen patients prescribed anticoagulants, were recruited using purposive and convenience sampling.
Participants identified multiple barriers and facilitators to tool implementation. Common barriers included limited visit time, challenges integrating the tool into existing workflows, role and scope-of-practice constraints, and variation in patient digital literacy. Facilitators included clear visualisation of bleeding risk, access to supporting evidence, familiar interface design and perceived potential to support patient engagement and shared decision-making. Several determinants functioned as both barriers and facilitators, depending on clinical context and user role.
This preimplementation qualitative study identified context-specific determinants that influence the adoption of an electronic shared decision-making tool for anticoagulant-related drug–drug interactions. Findings highlight the importance of early attention to workflow integration, role alignment and usability to support uptake in routine care. Addressing these factors during design and implementation may inform strategies to support adoption and future evaluation in real-world clinical settings.
by Helen W. Li, Jesse Kiprono Too, Sarah Nyanchama Nyariki, Charles Nathan Nessle, Sara Malone, Rachel Matsumoto, Teddy Ashibende Aurah, Jeffrey A. Blatnik, JoAnna Hunter-Squires, Ivan Seno Saruni
BackgroundCapacity for elective general surgical care is an important reflection of a health system’s ability to meet a population’s surgical needs and is currently known to be inadequate in many low- and middle-income countries. Patient agency is a key, understudied factor which shapes how and when patients ultimately decide to engage with formal care. Understanding factors which influence patient care seeking activity can have important implications for how current and future health systems may be utilized. This study aims to explore how patients approach the navigation and triage of their elective hernia condition within the Kenyan surgical care system.
MethodsWe conducted a qualitative study of 38 convenience-sampled patients diagnosed with an elective hernia condition at a tertiary referral hospital in Kenya between November 2023 and March 2024. We utilized Braun and Clarke’s six-step model of thematic analysis to generate key themes across the phases of care seeking, reaching and receiving as modeled in the Three Delays Framework.
ResultsWe identified three main cross-cutting themes including (1) the flow of power from patients to providers, and vice versa, take the form of consent or knowledge, respectively; (2) trust is a limited currency required for patients to engage with formal care; and (3) internal and external contextual factors remain the foundation for patient-provider care activities. We incorporated these themes together in a framework which illustrates the cyclical nature by which each factor feeds back on the others, ultimately affecting patient care.
ConclusionsFluctuating flows of patient power and trust interacts with existing infrastructural context to influence the ability of a health system to generate care. Recognizing the interaction of these key factors may have important bearing on the successful implementation of any larger systemic efforts or policies to improve access to elective surgical care.
Despite increasing palliative care capabilities in the USA, utilisation rates remain low for patients with advanced cancer, particularly among African American patients. To address this gap, a theory-driven, stakeholder-informed community health worker (CHW) palliative care intervention for African American patients with advanced cancer and their informal caregivers is currently being assessed through a hybrid type 1 effectiveness-implementation trial at four cancer centres across the USA. To improve the quality and efficiency of palliative care delivery, inform resource allocation and guide broad-scale implementation, it is essential to generate evidence on the economic value of palliative care programmes. The objectives of this study are to evaluate the cost-effectiveness and estimate the social value of a CHW palliative care intervention for African American patients with advanced cancer and their caregivers.
We will conduct cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) and a social return-on-investment (SROI) analysis to assess the value of the CHW palliative care intervention compared with enhanced standard of care. Standard, extended and distributional CEAs will be performed from the perspectives of an adopting organisation or payer (eg, Medicaid), the US healthcare sector and society. An SROI analysis will also be conducted to assess the social value of the intervention. These analyses will focus on estimating the costs, health and distributional impacts of the intervention.
This study protocol was approved by the Johns Hopkins Medicine Institutional Review Board (IRB00372476). All methods will be carried out in accordance with relevant guidelines and regulations. Written informed consent will be obtained from all subjects prior to study participation. This manuscript does not contain participant-level data. The full protocol will be available from the corresponding author on reasonable request. The dissemination of findings from the clinical trial and accompanying economic evaluation outlined in this manuscript will be multifaceted to maximise reach and impact. Research findings will be presented at relevant scientific conferences, submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals and shared with community stakeholders, including hospital leaders and administrators, providers, CHWs and patient advocacy groups.