A comparison of prior elicitation aggregation using the classical method and SHELF

Cameron J. Williams, Kevin J. Wilson and Nina Wilson

Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, 2021, vol. 184, issue 3, 920-940

Abstract: Subjective Bayesian prior distributions elicited from experts can be aggregated together to form group priors. This paper compares aggregated priors formed by equal weight aggregation, the classical method and the Sheffield elicitation framework to each other and individual expert priors, using an expert elicitation carried out for a clinical trial. Aggregation methods and individual expert prior distributions are compared using proper scoring rules to compare the informativeness and calibration of the distributions. The three aggregation methods outperform the individual experts, and the Sheffield elicitation framework performs best among them.

Date: 2021
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (2)

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1111/rssa.12691

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:bla:jorssa:v:184:y:2021:i:3:p:920-940

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://ordering.onli ... 1111/(ISSN)1467-985X

Access Statistics for this article

Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A is currently edited by A. Chevalier and L. Sharples

More articles in Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A from Royal Statistical Society Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().