MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2057800162 · doi:10.1515/em-2013-0017

On the Impact of Misclassification in an Ordinal Exposure Variable

2014· article· en· W2057800162 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueEpidemiologic Methods · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Causal Inference Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStatisticsVariable (mathematics)Ordinal dataVariablesOrdinal regressionEconometricsLinear regressionOutcome (game theory)MathematicsRegression analysisTest (biology)Power (physics)PsychologyMathematical economics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Say that interest focuses on the relationship between an exposure variable and an outcome variable; however, the exposure variable is subject to measurement error. While exceptions have been identified, in almost all circumstances nondifferential measurement error leads to attenuated regression coefficients and lost power to detect associations. In the case of an ordinal exposure variable subject to nondifferential misclassification, we confirm that power is always lost in a general test for association between the exposure and outcome variables. Surprisingly, however, we find that for a linear test of trend, a gain in power is possible.

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)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.071
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.240
Threshold uncertainty score0.937

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.071
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.491
GPT teacher head0.583
Teacher spread0.092 · 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