{"id":"W2002635395","doi":"10.1097/01.ede.0000040256.22618.12","title":"On the Use of Population Attributable Fraction to Determine Sample Size for Case-Control Studies of Gene-Environment Interaction","year":2003,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Epidemiology","topic":"Genetic Associations and Epidemiology","field":"Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology","cited_by":20,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"ca_institutions":"University of British Columbia","funders":"","keywords":"Odds ratio; Gene–environment interaction; Odds; Attributable risk; Interaction; Population; Sample size determination; Statistics; Fraction (chemistry); Genotype; Genetics; Logistic regression; Medicine; Environmental health; Mathematics; Biology; Chemistry; Gene","routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false,"invisible_to_affiliation_only":false},"retraction":null,"screen":null,"direct_labels":[],"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":["metaresearch"],"consensus_categories":["metaresearch"],"category_scores_codex":[0.354509,0.002120839,0.005363711,0.009557386,0.001399213,0.002607628,0.004783151,0.005472577,0.004110357],"category_scores_gemma":[0.6244462,0.001114688,0.004377656,0.005782697,0.007847779,0.004834698,0.004305549,0.004928517,0.001092927],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.001587482,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.001282708,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.003086314,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.002523885,"domain_scores_codex":[0.503686,0.4408932,0.01420756,0.01332613,0.02718503,0.0007021558],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.3329079,0.6213135,0.00933829,0.02760761,0.008369656,0.0004630954],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":"methods","domain_candidate":"methods","domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_scores_codex":[0.004040744,0.0003346524,0.1119269,0.007390182,0.0118646,0.001589205,0.003002379,0.01670007,0.003254815,0.1938378,0.01835919,0.6276994],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.004194689,0.006310534,0.14943,0.009889027,0.01061223,0.009396145,0.001541476,0.2005471,0.01663011,0.4405026,0.1496995,0.001246583],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"methods","genre_gemma":"methods","genre_scores_codex":[0.01263011,0.01140753,0.9627291,0.002099752,0.001317114,0.003521578,0.001055385,0.0005774936,0.004661864],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.2640321,0.005168129,0.7080759,0.004442062,0.001373091,0.01315435,0.001026434,0.0005821532,0.002145851],"genre_candidate":"methods","genre_consensus":"methods","teacher_disagreement_score":0.645491,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.7960054,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"machine_scores":{"provisional":true,"baseline":true,"maturity_gate_passed":false,"score_opus":0.134131471886814,"score_gpt":0.351251145505634,"score_spread":0.21711967361882,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","note":"Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed). Scores rank; they never assert a category."}}