Robustness of Bayesian Methods in Healthcare System Assessment: A Comprehensive Review
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.6000/1929-6029.2025.14.62Keywords:
Bayesian inference, healthcare system assessment, hierarchical models, cost‑effectiveness analysis, epidemiology, personalized medicine, policy evaluationAbstract
Background: Healthcare systems generate heterogeneous, incomplete, and evolving data; methods that combine prior knowledge with new evidence are needed.
Aim: The present research critically evaluates the usefulness and resilience of Bayesian methods for healthcare system assessment.
Scope: This study synthesizes foundational principles and contrasts with frequentist approaches; examines applications across quality of care benchmarking, health economic evaluation, epidemiologic surveillance, resource allocation, policy appraisal, and personalized medicine; and highlights computational advances enabling practical deployment.
Key Findings: Bayesian techniques provide partial pooling through hierarchical models, formal incorporation of prior information, accurate probabilistic inference, and dynamic updating as data accumulates. These features give more stable estimates in sparse settings, transparent quantification of uncertainty, and decision‑relevant outputs (e.g., posterior probabilities and cost-effectiveness acceptability). Modern samplers and approximate inference make complex models tractable, yet results remain sensitive to prior specification and data quality, stressing the need for validation, sensitivity analysis, and clear reporting.
Conclusion: Bayesian methods offer a meticulous, flexible framework for assessing performance, value, and equity in healthcare systems. They can enhance policy-making and clinical decision support when paired with principled prior elicitation, robust computation, and reproducible workflows. Next, the practical recommendations and research priorities to accelerate responsible adoption across healthcare analytics were outlined. At the end, this review highlights both methodological robustness and translational potential, positioning Bayesian methods as indispensable for evidence-based healthcare decision-making.
References
Spiegelhalter DJ, Abrams KR, Myles JP. Bayesian approaches to clinical trials and health-care evaluation. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd 2004. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/0470092602
Gelman A, Carlin JB, Stern HS, Dunson DB, Vehtari A, Rubin DB. Bayesian data analysis. 3rd ed. Boca Raton: Chapman & Hall/CRC 2013. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1201/b16018
Carlin BP, Louis TA. Bayesian methods for data analysis. 3rd ed. Boca Raton: Chapman & Hall/CRC 2008. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1201/b14884
Bernardo JM, Smith AFM. Bayesian theory. New York: Wiley 2009.
Brooks S, Gelman A, Jones G, Meng XL, editors. Handbook of Markov chain Monte Carlo. Boca Raton: Chapman & Hall/CRC 2011. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1201/b10905
Normand SLT, Shahian DM. Statistical and clinical aspects of hospital outcomes profiling. Stat Sci 2007; 22(2): 206-26. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1214/088342307000000096
Briggs A, Claxton K, Sculpher MJ. Decision modelling for health economic evaluation. Oxford: Oxford Univ Press 2006. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198526629.001.0001
Claxton K, Sculpher M, McCabe C, Briggs A, Akehurst R, Buxton M, et al. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis for NICE technology assessment: not an optional extra. Health Econ 2005; 14(4): 339-47. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.985
Best N, Richardson S, Thomson A. A comparison of Bayesian spatial models for disease mapping. Stat Methods Med Res 2005; 14(1): 35-59. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1191/0962280205sm388oa
Flaxman S, Mishra S, Gandy A, Unwin HJT, Mellan TA, Coupland H, et al. Estimating the effects of non-pharmaceutical interventions on COVID-19 in Europe. Nature 2020; 584(7820): 257-61. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2405-7
Briggs AH. Handling uncertainty in cost-effectiveness models. Pharmacoeconomics 2000; 17(5): 479-500. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-200017050-00006
Parmigiani G, Inoue LYT. Decision Theory: Principles and Approaches. Chichester, UK: Wiley, 2009. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470746684
Zhou J, Wang F, Hu J, Ye J. From micro to macro: Data driven phenotyping by densification of longitudinal electronic medical records. In Proceedings of the 20th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining 2014; 135-144. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/2623330.2623711
Neal RM. Bayesian learning for neural networks. New York: Springer 2012.
Ghahramani Z. Probabilistic Machine Learning and Artificial Intelligence. Nature 2015; 521(7553): 452-459.
Wasserman L. All of statistics: a concise course in statistical inference. New York: Springer 2004. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-21736-9
Betancourt M. A conceptual introduction to Hamiltonian Monte Carlo. arXiv preprint arXiv:1701.02434, 2017.
Blei DM, Kucukelbir A, McAuliffe JD. Variational inference: a review for statisticians. J Am Stat Assoc 2017; 112(518): 859-77. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.2017.1285773
Carpenter B, Gelman A, Hoffman MD, Lee D, Goodrich B, Betancourt M, et al. Stan: a probabilistic programming language. J Stat Softw 2017; 76(1): 1-32. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v076.i01
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). Complications and deaths – hospital dataset. CMS 2024. Available from: https://data.cms.gov/provider-data/
Krumholz HM, Wang Y, Mattera JA, Wang Y, Han LF, Ingber MJ, et al. An administrative claims model suitable for profiling hospital performance based on 30-day mortality rates among patients with an acute myocardial infarction. Circulation 2006; 113(13): 1683-92. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.105.611186
Shahian DM, Wolf RE, Iezzoni LI, Kirle L, Normand SLT. Variability in the measurement of hospital-wide mortality rates. N Engl J Med 2010; 363(26): 2530-9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMsa1006396
Christiansen CL, Morris CN. Hierarchical Poisson regression modeling. J Am Stat Assoc 1997; 92(438): 618-32. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1997.10474013
Normand SLT, Glickman ME, Gatsonis CA. Statistical methods for profiling providers of medical care: issues and applications. J Am Stat Assoc 1997; 92(439): 803-14. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1997.10474036
Gelman A, Jakulin A, Pittau MG, Su YS. A weakly informative default prior distribution for logistic and other regression models. Ann Appl Stat 2008; 2(4): 1360-83. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1214/08-AOAS191
Stan Development Team. RStan: the R interface to Stan. Version 2.32. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing 2024. Available from: https://mc-stan.org/
R Core Team. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing 2024. https://www.R-project.org/
Austin PC. A comparison of Bayesian methods for profiling hospital performance. Med Decis Making 2002; 22(2): 163-72. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0272989X0202200213
Spiegelhalter DJ. Funnel plots for comparing institutional performance. Stat Med 2005; 24(8): 1185-202. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.1970
Mandel JS, Bond JH, Church TR, Snover DC, Bradley GM, Schuman LM, et al. Reducing mortality from colorectal cancer by screening for fecal occult blood. N Engl J Med 1993; 328(19): 1365-71. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM199305133281901
Atkin WS, Edwards R, Kralj-Hans I, Wooldrage K, Hart AR, Northover JM, et al. Once-only flexible sigmoidoscopy screening in prevention of colorectal cancer: a multicentre randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2010; 375(9726): 1624-33. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(10)60551-X
Zauber AG, Lansdorp-Vogelaar I, Knudsen AB, Wilschut J, van Ballegooijen M, Kuntz KM. Evaluating test strategies for colorectal cancer screening: a decision analysis for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med 2008; 149(9): 659-69. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-149-9-200811040-00244
Ladabaum U, Ferrandez A, Lanas A. Cost-effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening in high-risk Spanish patients: use of a validated model to inform public policy. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2010; 19(11): 2765-76. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-10-0530
Gold MR, Siegel JE, Russell LB, Weinstein MC, editors. Cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. New York: Oxford Univ Press 1996. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780195108248.001.0001
Fenwick E, Claxton K, Sculpher M. Representing uncertainty: the role of cost-effectiveness acceptability curves. Health Econ 2001; 10(8): 779-87. https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.635 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.635
Briggs AH. A Bayesian approach to stochastic cost-effectiveness analysis. Health Econ 1999; 8(3): 257-61. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1050(199905)8:3<257::AID-HEC427>3.0.CO;2-E
Claxton K, Sculpher M, Culyer A. Mark versus Luke? Appropriate methods for the evaluation of public health interventions. York: Univ of York, Centre for Health Economics 2007. CHE research paper no. 31. https://www.york.ac.uk/media/che/documents/papers/researchpapers/rp31_evaluation_of_public_health_interventions.pdf
Brauner JM, Mindermann S, Sharma M, et al. Inferring the effectiveness of government interventions against COVID-19. Science 2021; 371(6531): eabd9338. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abd9338
Kendall A, Gal Y. What uncertainties do we need in Bayesian deep learning for computer vision? Adv Neural Inf Process Syst 2017; 30: 5574-84.
Leibig C, Allken V, Ayhan MS, Berens P, Wahl S. Leveraging uncertainty information from deep neural networks for disease detection. Sci Rep 2017; 7(1): 17816. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-17876-z
Gal Y, Ghahramani Z. Dropout as a Bayesian approximation: representing model uncertainty in deep learning. Proc ICML 2016; 1050-9.
Gulshan V, Peng L, Coram M, Stumpe MC, Wu D, Narayanaswamy A, et al. Development and validation of a deep learning algorithm for detection of diabetic retinopathy in retinal fundus photographs. JAMA 2016; 316(22): 2402-10. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2016.17216
Kuleshov V, Fenner N, Ermon S. Accurate uncertainties for deep learning using calibrated regression. Proc ICML 2018; 2796-804.
Carneiro G, Tao Pu LZC, Singh R, Burt A. Deep learning uncertainty and confidence calibration for the five-class polyp classification from colonoscopy. Med Image Anal 2020; 62: 101653. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.media.2020.101653
Gelman A, Simpson D, Betancourt M. The prior can often only be understood in the context of the likelihood. Entropy 2017; 19(10): 555. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/e19100555
Spiegelhalter DJ. The art of statistics: learning from data. London: Penguin 2019. https://books.google.com.sa/books? id=CiZeDwAAQBAJ
Khozin S, Blumenthal GM, Pazdur R. Real-world data for clinical evidence generation in oncology. J Natl Cancer Inst 2017; 109(11): djx187. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djx187
Ghahramani Z. Probabilistic Machine Learning and Artificial Intelligence. Nature 2015; 521(7553): 452-459. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nature14541
Basu A. Economics of individualization in comparative effectiveness research and a basis for a patient-centered health care. J Health Econ 2011; 30(3): 549-59. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhealeco.2011.03.004
Bernardo JM, Bayarri MJ, Berger JO, Dawid AP, Heckerman D, Smith AFM, et al. Eds. Bayesian statistics 9. Oxford: Oxford Univ Press 2011. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199694587.001.0001
Ashby D, Smith AFM. Evidence-based medicine as Bayesian decision-making. Stat Med 2000; 19(23): 3291-305. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0258(20001215)19:23<3291::AID-SIM627>3.0.CO;2-T
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Policy for Journals/Articles with Open Access
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post links to their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work
Policy for Journals / Manuscript with Paid Access
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Publisher retain copyright .
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post links to their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work .
