Bayesian statistical approaches are extensively used in new statistical methods but have not been adopted at the same rate in clinical and translational (C&T) research. The goal of this paper is to accelerate the transition of new methods into practice by improving the C&T researcher’s ability to gain confidence in interpreting and implementing Bayesian analyses.

We developed a Bayesian data analysis plan and implemented that plan for a two-arm clinical trial comparing the effectiveness of a new opioid in reducing time to discharge from the post-operative anesthesia unit and nerve block usage in surgery. Through this application, we offer a brief tutorial on Bayesian methods and exhibit how to apply four Bayesian statistical packages from STATA, SAS, and RStan to conduct linear and logistic regression analyses in clinical research.

The analysis results in our application were robust to statistical package and consistent across a wide range of prior distributions. STATA was the most approachable package for linear regression but was more limited in the models that could be fitted and easily summarized. SAS and R offered more straightforward documentation and data management for the posteriors. They also offered direct programming of the likelihood making them more easily extendable to complex problems.

Bayesian analysis is now accessible to a broad range of data analysts and should be considered in more C&T research analyses. This will allow C&T research teams the ability to adopt and interpret Bayesian methodology in more complex problems where Bayesian approaches are often needed.

Neurodevelopmental disabilities in children with CHD can result from neurologic injury sustained in the cardiac ICU when children are at high risk of acute neurologic injury. Physicians typically order and specify frequency for serial bedside nursing clinical neurologic assessments to evaluate patients’ neurologic status.

We surveyed cardiac ICU physicians to understand how these assessments are performed, and the attitudes of physicians on the utility of these assessments. The survey contained questions regarding assessment elements, assessment frequency, communication of neurologic status changes, and optimisation of assessments.

Surveys were received from 50 institutions, with a response rate of 86%. Routine clinical neurologic assessments were reported to be performed in 94% of institutions and standardised in 56%. Pupillary reflex was the most commonly reported assessment. In all, 77% of institutions used a coma scale, with Glasgow Coma Scale being most common. For patients with acute brain injury, 82% of institutions reported performing assessments hourly, whereas assessment frequency was more variable for low-risk and high-risk patients without overt brain injury. In all, 84% of respondents thought their current practice for assessing and monitoring neurologic status was suboptimal. Only 41% felt that the Glasgow Coma Scale was a valuable tool for assessing neurologic function in the cardiac ICU, and 91% felt that a standardised approach to assessing pre-illness neurologic function would be valuable.

Routine nursing neurologic assessments are conducted in most surveyed paediatric cardiac ICUs, although assessment characteristics vary greatly between institutions. Most clinicians rated current neurologic assessment practices as suboptimal.