Inverse probability weighted estimating equations for randomized trials in transfusion medicine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.264 | 0.526 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.014 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.015 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.004 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".