MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1989701181 · doi:10.1681/asn.2010090941

Adenovirus Interstitial Nephritis and Rejection in an Allograft

2011· article· en· W1989701181 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Society of Nephrology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPrenatal Screening and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCovariateMedicineStatisticsVariance (accounting)Value (mathematics)Mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<h3>Background</h3> Healthcare provider performance is commonly assessed using patient outcomes, e.g. survival rates. Patient characteristics that may affect outcomes in the absence of genuine provider-level differences must therefore be balanced across providers to ensure a fair comparison. There are many methods that can accommodate this patient ‘casemix’ but none that also allow the assessment of provider-level covariate effects, i.e. the potential causes of performance differences. We aim to demonstrate the utility of multilevel latent class (MLC) modelling to identify causal provider-level covariate effects after accommodating patient differences. <h3>Methods</h3> We simulated data for patients and providers, based on a previously utilised real-world dataset of patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer. Age at diagnosis, sex and socioeconomic status were included at the patient level, and we explored a continuous outcome. We included both binary and continuous effects at the provider level, to reflect organisational features such as surgeon speciality or available beds, although these were analysed separately to demonstrate proof-of-principle. We simulated unique sets of 100 datasets using a range of coefficient effect values and error variances. Interest lies in the ability of the MLC model to recover these simulated provider-level coefficient effects. <h3>Results</h3> Models contained one patient-level latent class and up to five provider-level latent classes. For the binary provider-level covariate, median recovered values were almost identical to simulated effects throughout, e.g. for the simulated coefficient value 0.500 at 33% error variance, the median recovered value was 0.499 (95% CI 0.489–0.509) across all models. For the continuous provider-level covariate, median recovered values improved as the number of provider-level latent classes were increased, e.g. for the simulated coefficient value 0.200 at 33% error variance, the median recovered value was 0.153 (95% CI 0.113–0.184) for two provider-level classes and 0.191 (95% CI 0.168–0.210) for five provider-level classes. <h3>Discussion</h3> The MLC modelling approach achieved successful recovery of simulated coefficient values, within credible intervals for at least three provider-level latent classes. Very small simulated coefficient values were not recovered as well as higher values, which may be due to the variability introduced during simulation dominating the coefficient effect. There is also some attenuation of effect seen for the continuous provider-level covariate. We have demonstrated the utility of this approach to separate modelling for prediction (to accommodate patient casemix) and for causal inference (to explore provider-level effects) across a data hierarchy. There is much scope to extend the assessment of upper-level causal effects by consideration of a multivariable DAG.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.309
Threshold uncertainty score0.225

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.254 · 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