A comparison of prior elicitation aggregation using the classical method and SHELF. (7th May 2021)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Williams, Cameron J.; Wilson, Kevin J.; Wilson, Nina
• Is Part Of: Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Volume 184:Number 3(2021)
• Page Start: 920
• Page End: 940
• Publication Date: 2021-05-07
• Subjects: expert elicitation -- expert judgement -- prior aggregation -- sample size calculation -- subjective prior distributions -- subjective probability; Social sciences -- Statistical methods -- Periodicals; Statistics -- Periodicals; 300.15195
• DOI: 10.1111/rssa.12691
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0964-1998

Abstract

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.