In frequentist statistics, one can hardly take a sip of coffee without someone mentioning Fisher information and the Cramer-Rao lower bound. On the other hand, from my limited experience in the field of statistics, the analogous van Trees inequality (sometimes referred to as the Bayesian Cramer-Rao lower bound) isn't mentioned nearly as much.
Is this just my (mis)perception? Or is there some good reason why Bayesians don't care as much about such inequalities? Perhaps it is simply because it is harder to compute?