On the Existence of Constant Accrual Rates in Clinical Trials and Direction for Future Research
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many clinical trials fall short of their accrual goals. This can be avoided with accurate accrual prediction tools. Past researchers provide important methodological alternative models for predicting accrual in clinical trials. One model allows for slow accrual at the start of the study, which eventually reaches a threshold. A simpler model assumes a constant rate of accrual. A comparison has been attempted but we wish to point out some important considerations when comparing these two models. In fact, we can examine the reasonableness of a constant accrual assumption (simpler model) which had data 239 days into a three-year study. We can now update that and report accumulated from the full three years of accrual data and we can demonstrate that constant accrual rate assumption was met in this particular study. We will use this report to frame future research in the area of accrual prediction.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.078 | 0.401 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it