MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2107476958 · doi:10.1093/aje/kwq384

Multistate Analysis of Interval-Censored Longitudinal Data: Application to a Cohort Study on Performance Status Among Patients Diagnosed With Cancer

2010· article· en· W2107476958 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Rinku Sutradhar, Lisa Barbera, Hsien Seow, Doris Howell, Amna Husain, Deb Dudgeon

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Epidemiology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesUniversity of Toronto
FundersOntario Institute for Cancer ResearchCancer Research Institute
KeywordsObservational studyMedicineCohortMarkov modelMarkov chainCohort studyStatisticsCancerLongitudinal studyDemographyMathematicsInternal medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In observational studies on cancer patients, progression of performance status over time can be described by using a multistate model in which state-to-state transitions represent changes in a patient's health condition. Although a patient experiences transitions in continuous time, assessments on the patient are often made at irregularly spaced time points. In this paper, the authors formulate a Markov 4-state model for examining longitudinal data on performance status collected under intermittent observation. The cohort consisted of 11,342 patients diagnosed with cancer in Ontario, Canada, from 2007 to 2009. The authors extend the model to estimate the predicted probability of reaching the absorbing state, death, over various time intervals. The authors also illustrate what happens to the estimated transition intensities if the true observational scheme is overlooked. Methods for multistate analysis should be used by epidemiologists, since they prove particularly useful for examining the complexities of disease processes.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.210
GPT teacher head0.459
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations46
Published2010
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of EpidemiologySame topicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeFrench-language works237,207