MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2088893370 · doi:10.2202/1557-4679.1125

Fitting Smooth-in-Time Prognostic Risk Functions via Logistic Regression

2009· article· en· W2088893370 on OpenAlexafffund
James A. Hanley, Olli S. Miettinen

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International Journal of Biostatistics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFonds Québécois de la Recherche sur la Nature et les Technologies
KeywordsLogistic regressionHazardProportional hazards modelStatisticsParametric statisticsEconometricsRegressionHazard ratioRegression analysisMathematicsComputer scienceConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When considering treatment options, a physician ideally has access to prognoses for various spans of prospective time, meaning known risks specific for these and also for both treatment and the profile of the patient. Accordingly, investigators ideally would report estimates of such risks from clinical trials and their non-experimental counterparts. To the extent that such risk estimates have been reported at all, they have mainly been based on the semi-parametric regression model of Cox. We focus on a family of fully-parametric hazard models of an attractive, versatile form that readily allows for non-proportionality, yet models that have not been easy to fit with standard statistical software. We elaborate an approach, recently proposed, to fitting such hazard functions via logistic regression. From the fitted hazard function, cumulative incidence and, thus, risk functions of time, treatment and profile can be derived. This approach accommodates any log-linear hazard function of prognostic time, treatment, and the prognostic indicators defining the patient's prognostic profile.

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 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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.407
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.194
GPT teacher head0.416
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations30
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe International Journal of BiostatisticsSame topicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeFrench-language works237,207