MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Assessing Variance Components in Multilevel Linear Models using Approximate Bayes Factors: A Case-Study of Ethnic Disparities in Birth Weight

2011· article· en· W1677380367 on OpenAlexaff
Benjamin R. Saville, Amy H. Herring, Jay S. Kaufman

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A (Statistics in Society) · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBirth, Development, and Health
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Institute of Environmental Health SciencesNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsRandom effects modelBayes' theoremMultilevel modelStatisticsMathematicsLinear modelBayes factorHeteroscedasticityGeneralized linear mixed modelEconometricsMedicineBayesian probabilityMeta-analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Racial/ethnic disparities in birthweight are a large source of differential morbidity and mortality worldwide and have remained largely unexplained in epidemiologic models. We assess the impact of maternal ancestry and census tract residence on infant birth weights in New York City and the modifying effects of race and nativity by incorporating random effects in a multilevel linear model. Evaluating the significance of these predictors involves the test of whether the variances of the random effects are equal to zero. This is problematic because the null hypothesis lies on the boundary of the parameter space. We generalize an approach for assessing random effects in the two-level linear model to a broader class of multilevel linear models by scaling the random effects to the residual variance and introducing parameters that control the relative contribution of the random effects. After integrating over the random effects and variance components, the resulting integrals needed to calculate the Bayes factor can be efficiently approximated with Laplace's method.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.044
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.134
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.235

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0440.134
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.156
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.200 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A (Statistics in Society)Same topicBirth, Development, and HealthFrench-language works237,207