On Bayesian shared component disease mapping and ecological regression with errors in covariates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent literature on Bayesian disease mapping presents shared component models (SCMs) for joint spatial modeling of two or more diseases with common risk factors. In this study, Bayesian hierarchical formulations of shared component disease mapping and ecological models are explored and developed in the context of ecological regression, taking into consideration errors in covariates. A review of multivariate disease mapping models (MultiVMs) such as the multivariate conditional autoregressive models that are also part of the more recent Bayesian disease mapping literature is presented. Some insights into the connections and distinctions between the SCM and MultiVM procedures are communicated. Important issues surrounding (appropriate) formulation of shared- and disease-specific components, consideration/choice of spatial or non-spatial random effects priors, and identification of model parameters in SCMs are explored and discussed in the context of spatial and ecological analysis of small area multivariate disease or health outcome rates and associated ecological risk factors. The methods are illustrated through an in-depth analysis of four-variate road traffic accident injury (RTAI) data: gender-specific fatal and non-fatal RTAI rates in 84 local health areas in British Columbia (Canada). Fully Bayesian inference via Markov chain Monte Carlo simulations is presented.
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 | 0.017 | 0.049 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".