While there is wide agreement that physical activity is an important component of a healthy lifestyle, it is unclear how many people adhere to public health recommendations on physical activity. The Physical Activity Guidelines (PAG), published by the CDC, provides guidelines to American adults, but it is difficult to assess compliance with these guidelines. The PAG further complicates adherence assessment by recommending activity to occur in at least 10 min bouts. To better understand the measurement capabilities of various instruments to quantify activity, and to propose an approach to evaluate activity relative to the PAG, researchers at Iowa State University administered the Physical Activity Measurement Survey (PAMS) to over 1000 participants in four different Iowa counties. In this paper, we develop a two-part Bayesian measurement error model and apply it to the PAMS data in order to assess compliance with the PAG in the Iowa adult population. The model accurately accounts for the 10 min bout requirement put forth in the PAG. The measurement error model corrects biased estimates and accounts for day-to-day variation in activity. The model is also applied to the nationally representative National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey.

In the context of an increasing number of publications of trial data analysed by Bayesian methods, clinicians need support to better understand Bayesian statistical methods. The existing checklists are intended for people who already know these methods. We aimed to establish and validate a checklist that contains a group of items considered crucial in interpreting the results of a phase III RCT analysed with Bayesian methods.
A team of biostatisticians created a checklist of previously reported items and additional items identified from a literature review. Using three different articles in three rounds, the items were then validated by residents in anaesthesiology with no skills in statistics.
Based on an initial item list, three rounds led to a consensus checklist. Eleven items were considered important information to be specified for understanding the validity of the results. Of these, three were considered essential: specification of the prior, source of the prior (when prior is informative), and the effect size point estimate with its credible interval.
The checklist can help clinicians interpret the results of a phase III randomised clinical trial analysed by Bayesian methods, even clinicians with no particular knowledge of statistics, to ensure that the major elements of the statistical section are present and valid. Care should be taken in interpreting the results of a trial analysed by Bayesian methods that are not reported with these three essential items because the validity of the results cannot be established.