MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Marginally Specified Generalized Linear Mixed Models: A Robust Approach

2002· letter· en· W2041200301 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueBiometrics · 2002
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityDalhousie University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsGeneralized linear mixed modelGeneralized linear modelMixed modelCovariateInterpretabilityRandom effects modelWeightingMarginal modelMathematicsEstimatorEconometricsInferenceLinear modelStatisticsFlexibility (engineering)PopulationComputer scienceRegression analysisMachine learningArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Longitudinal data modeling is complicated by the necessity to deal appropriately with the correlation between observations made on the same individual. Building on an earlier nonrobust version proposed by Heagerty (1999, Biometrics 55, 688-698), our robust marginally specified generalized linear mixed model (ROBMS-GLMM) provides an effective method for dealing with such data. This model is one of the first to allow both population-averaged and individual-specific inference. As well, it adopts the flexibility and interpretability of generalized linear mixed models for introducing dependence but builds a regression structure for the marginal mean, allowing valid application with time-dependent (exogenous) and time-independent covariates. These new estimators are obtained as solutions of a robustified likelihood equation involving Huber's least favorable distribution and a collection of weights. Huber's least favorable distribution produces estimates that are resistant to certain deviations from the random effects distributional assumptions. Innovative weighting strategies enable the ROBMS-GLMM to perform well when faced with outlying observations both in the response and covariates. We illustrate the methodology with an analysis of a prospective longitudinal study of laryngoscopic endotracheal intubation, a skill that numerous health-care professionals are expected to acquire. The principal goal of our research is to achieve robust inference in longitudinal analyses.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.421
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.327
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.019 · 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