MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2111616613 · doi:10.1002/sim.5827

Inverse probability weighted estimating equations for randomized trials in transfusion medicine

2013· article· en· W2111616613 on OpenAlexafffund
Richard J. Cook, Ker‐Ai Lee, Meaghan S. Cuerden, Cecilia A. Cotton

Bibliographic record

VenueStatistics in Medicine · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods in Clinical Trials
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineConfoundingRandomized controlled trialInverse probabilityClinical trialPlatelet transfusionIntensive care medicinePlateletEmergency medicineInternal medicineStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Thrombocytopenia is a condition characterized by extremely low platelet counts, which puts patients at elevated risk of morbidity and mortality because of bleeding. Trials in transfusion medicine are routinely designed to assess the effect of experimental platelet products on patients' platelet counts. In such trials, patients may receive multiple platelet transfusions over a predefined period of treatment, and a response is available from each such administration. The resulting data comprised multiple responses per patient, and although it is natural to want to use this data in testing for treatment effects, naive analyses of the multiple responses can yield biased estimates of the probability of response and associated treatment effects. These biases arise because only subsets of the patients randomized contribute response data on the second and subsequent administrations of therapy and the balance between treatment groups with respect to potential confounding factors is lost. We discuss the design and analysis issues involved in this setting and make recommendations for the design of future platelet transfusion trials.

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)0.072
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.882
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
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 score0.810
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0720.882
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.570
GPT teacher head0.583
Teacher spread0.012 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations3
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStatistics in MedicineSame topicStatistical Methods in Clinical TrialsFrench-language works237,207