Following up on this story, Bob Goodman writes:

A most recent issue of the New England Journal of Medicine published a study entitled “Biventricular Pacing for Atrioventricular Block and Systolic Dysfunction,” (N Engl J Med 2013; 368:1585-1593), whereby “A hierarchical Bayesian proportional-hazards model was used for analysis of the primary outcome.” It is the first study I can recall in this journal that has reported on Table 2 (primary outcomes) “The Posterior Probability of Hazard Ratio < 1" (which in this case was .9978).

This is ok, but to be really picky I will say that there’s typically not so much reason to care about the posterior probability that the effect is greater than 1; I’d rather have an estimate of the effect. Also we should be using informative priors.

[...] More plain old everyday Bayesianism (andrewgelman.com) [...]