Applications of the Bayesian Methods in Clinical Trials with Large Sample Size

Crossmark

Main Article Content


Abstract

Bayesian methods have gained prominence as robust alternatives to traditional frequentist approaches in the design and analysis of clinical trials, particularly those involving large sample sizes. While frequentist methods rely on fixed hypotheses and long-run probability interpretations, Bayesian frameworks incorporate prior knowledge and allow for iterative updating of evidence as data accrue. This adaptability facilitates the implementation of innovative trial structures such as adaptive designs and platform trials, while also supporting real-time decision-making. The integration of historical or external data within Bayesian analyses further enhances trial efficiency, especially in interim monitoring and interpretation of treatment effects. Despite these advantages, the broader adoption of Bayesian methods in confirmatory Phase III trials remains constrained by computational demands, challenges in the elicitation and justification of prior distributions, and varying degrees of regulatory acceptance. Nevertheless, advancements in high-performance computing, the emergence of hybrid Bayesian–frequentist methodologies, and growing regulatory engagement underscore a progressive shift toward broader implementation. This paper critically examines the evolution, methodological underpinnings, and practical applications of Bayesian approaches in large-sample clinical trials, offering a comparative assessment with frequentist methods. It also outlines key benefits, prevailing limitations, and potential trajectories for future research and regulatory alignment. These insights contribute to ongoing discourse on optimizing trial design for enhanced scientific rigor, ethical standards, and decision-making in evidence-based medicine.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Citation Metrics & Similar Scopus Articles

Data source Crossref
0
citations
Citation counts are source-specific and may differ because database coverage, reference matching, and update schedules are different. Counts are not added together. Crossref values represent citation links registered and matched by Crossref.
Check Secondary Documents in Scopus
Open this article in Scopus, then check the Secondary documents tab. Use Manual Citation Fallback only for counts you have verified manually.
Open in Scopus
Similar Scopus Articles
Scopus
  1. Wang J. (2027)
    Analysis and Applications of Neuromorphic Memristors in Artificial Intelligence Computing
    Nano Micro Letters, 19(1)
  2. Feng X. (2027)
    Designing Efficient Inverted Perovskite Solar Cells with Self-Assembled Monolayer Hole Transport Layers
    Nano Micro Letters, 19(1)
  3. Lee H. (2027)
    Low-Temperature All-Solid-State Batteries
    Nano Micro Letters, 19(1)

Article Details

How to Cite
Amani, D. J., Bishir, A., Usman, M. A., Amos, S., Yelwa, A., & Nyam, P. W. (2025). Applications of the Bayesian Methods in Clinical Trials with Large Sample Size. Mikailalsys Journal of Mathematics and Statistics, 4(1), 61-71. https://doi.org/10.58578/mjms.v4i1.7483

References

Berry, S. M., Connor, J. T., & Lewis, R. J. (2024). The platform trial: An efficient strategy for evaluating multiple treatments. New England Journal of Medicine, 390(14), 1287–1296. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMra2309876

European Medicines Agency (EMA). (2024). Reflection paper on Bayesian approaches in confirmatory trials. EMA/CHMP/2024/055.

Food and Drug Administration (FDA). (2023). Guidance for the use of Bayesian statistics in medical device clinical trials. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Hagar, R., & Golchi, S. (2025). Computational challenges in large-scale Bayesian clinical trials. Journal of Biostatistics, 48(2), 120–135.

Lee, J., Smith, R., & Zhao, Y. (2024). Priors in Bayesian clinical trials: Balancing subjectivity and credibility. Clinical Trials, 21(3), 245–260.

Lopez-Rey, P., Chen, M., & Davis, L. (2025). Adoption of Bayesian methods in confirmatory trials: Trends and barriers. Contemporary Clinical Trials, 125, 107007. https://doi.org/10.1016 /j.cct.2025.107007

Marks, K., Thompson, H., & Nguyen, P. (2025). Bayesian adaptive designs in large-scale clinical studies: A systematic review. Trials, 26(1), 112. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-025-11234

Spiegelhalter, D. J., et al. (2024). Ethical advantages of Bayesian adaptive designs in modern clinical research. Journal of Medical E thics, 50(5),287–294.https://doi.org/10.1136/mede thics-2024-109876