A marginal structural model for multiple-outcome survival data:assessing the impact of injection drug use on several causes of death in the Canadian Co-infection Cohort
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is often the case that interest lies in the effect of an exposure on each of several distinct event types. For example, we are motivated to investigate in the impact of recent injection drug use on deaths due to each of cancer, end-stage liver disease, and overdose in the Canadian Co-infection Cohort (CCC). We develop a marginal structural model that permits estimation of cause-specific hazards in situations where more than one cause of death is of interest. Marginal structural models allow for the causal effect of treatment on outcome to be estimated using inverse-probability weighting under the assumption of no unmeasured confounding; these models are particularly useful in the presence of time-varying confounding variables, which may also mediate the effect of exposures. An asymptotic variance estimator is derived, and a cumulative incidence function estimator is given. We compare the performance of the proposed marginal structural model for multiple-outcome data to that of conventional competing risks models in simulated data and demonstrate the use of the proposed approach in the CCC.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.018 | 0.039 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".