MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2088311091 · doi:10.1198/jasa.2009.0004

Robust Estimation of Mean Functions and Treatment Effects for Recurrent Events Under Event-Dependent Censoring and Termination: Application to Skeletal Complications in Cancer Metastatic to Bone

2009· article· en· W2088311091 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

VenueJournal of the American Statistical Association · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods in Clinical Trials
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCensoring (clinical trials)Inverse probabilityStatisticsEvent (particle physics)Breast cancerMarginal structural modelEvent dataMarginal distributionClinical trialMathematicsEconometricsMedicineCancerConfidence intervalCovariateInternal medicineRandom variable

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In clinical trials featuring recurrent clinical events, the definition and estimation of treatment
\neffects involves a number of interesting issues, especially when loss to follow-up may be eventrelated
\nand when terminal events such as death preclude the occurrence of further events. This
\npaper discusses a clinical trial of breast cancer patients with bone metastases where the recurrent
\nevents are skeletal complications, and where patients may die during the trial. We argue that treatment
\neffects should be based on marginal rate and mean functions. When recurrent event data are
\nsubject to event-dependent censoring, however, ordinary marginal methods may yield inconsistent
\nestimates. Incorporating correctly specified inverse probability of censoring weights into analyses
\ncan protect against dependent censoring and yield consistent estimates of marginal features. An
\nalternative approach is to obtain estimates of rate and mean functions from models that involve
\nsome conditioning to render censoring conditionally independent. We consider three methods of
\nestimating mean functions of recurrent event processes and examine the bias and efficiency of
\nunweighted and inverse probability weighted versions of the methods with and without a terminating
\nevent. We compare the methods via simulation and use them to analyse the data from the
\nbreast cancer trial.

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)0.014
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.952
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.014
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 head0.200
GPT teacher head0.509
Teacher spread0.309 · 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