MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1982616925 · doi:10.1002/cjs.11198

A semiparametric linear transformation model to estimate causal effects for survival data

2013· article· en· W1982616925 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Huazhen Lin, Yi Li, Liang Jiang, Gang Li

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Statistics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods in Clinical Trials
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Cancer InstituteProgram for New Century Excellent Talents in UniversityNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsSemiparametric regressionSemiparametric modelEstimatorTransformation (genetics)EconometricsMathematicsParametric statisticsProportional hazards modelGeneralized linear modelLinear regressionEstimating equationsLinear modelStatisticsPower transformData transformationApplied mathematicsComputer scienceData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Semiparametric linear transformation models serve as useful alternatives to the Cox proportional hazard model. In this study, we use the semiparametric linear transformation model to analyze survival data with selective compliance. We estimate regression parameters and the transformation function based on pseudo‐likelihood and a series of estimating equations. We show that the estimators for the regression parameters and transformation function are consistent and asymptotically normal, and both converge to their true values at the rate of , the convergence rate expected for a parametric model. The practical utility of the methods is confirmed via simulations as well as an application of a clinical trial to evaluate the effectiveness of sentinel node biopsy in guiding the treatment of invasive melanoma. The Canadian Journal of Statistics 42: 18–35; 2014 © 2013 Statistical Society of Canada

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.143
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.265
Threshold uncertainty score0.864

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.143
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.574
GPT teacher head0.533
Teacher spread0.041 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations14
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of StatisticsSame topicStatistical Methods in Clinical TrialsFrench-language works237,207