MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2017659064 · doi:10.1080/10543406.2013.813517

Bayesian Inference for Skew-Normal Mixture Models With Left-Censoring

2013· article· en· W2017659064 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Getachew Dagne

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBayesian Methods and Mixture Models
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Mental HealthUniversity of Windsor
KeywordsCensoring (clinical trials)SkewnessMathematicsStatisticsMarkov chain Monte CarloSkewTobit modelBayesian probabilityEconometricsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Assays to measure concentration of antibody after vaccination are often subject to left-censoring due to a lower detection limit (LDL), leading to a high proportion of observations below the detection limit. Not accounting for such left-censoring appropriately can lead to biased parameter estimates. To properly adjust for left-censoring and a high proportion of observations at LDL, this article proposes a mixture model combining a point mass below LDL and a Tobit model with skew-elliptical error distribution. We show that skew-elliptical distributions, where the skew-normal and skew-t are special cases, have great flexibility for simultaneously handling left-censoring, skewness, and heaviness in the tails of a distribution of a response variable with left-censored data. A Bayesian procedure is used to estimate model parameters. Two real data sets from a study of the measles vaccine and an HIV/AIDS study are used to illustrate the proposed models.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.025
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.071
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.134

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0250.071
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.035
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.289 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations12
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Biopharmaceutical StatisticsSame topicBayesian Methods and Mixture ModelsFrench-language works237,207