A joint model for interval‐censored functional decline trajectories under informative observation
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Multi-state models are useful for modelling disease progression where the state space of the process is used to represent the discrete disease status of subjects. Often, the disease process is only observed at clinical visits, and the schedule of these visits can depend on the disease status of patients. In such situations, the frequency and timing of observations may depend on transition times that are themselves unobserved in an interval-censored setting. There is a potential for bias if we model a disease process with informative observation times as a non-informative observation scheme with pre-specified examination times. In this paper, we develop a joint model for the disease and observation processes to ensure valid inference because the follow-up process may itself contain information about the disease process. The transitions for each subject are modelled using a Markov process, where bivariate subject-specific random effects are used to link the disease and observation models. Inference is based on a Bayesian framework, and we apply our joint model to the analysis of a large study examining functional decline trajectories of palliative care patients.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it