MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2122351741 · doi:10.1017/s071498081500001x

Modelling the Age Dynamics of Chronic Health Conditions: Life-Table-Consistent Transition Probabilities and their Application

2015· article· fr· W2122351741 on OpenAlexaff
Frank T. Denton, Byron G. Spencer

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal on Aging / La Revue canadienne du vieillissement · 2015
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInsurance, Mortality, Demography, Risk Management
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPopulationIncidence (geometry)CohortDemographyMathematicsPath (computing)StatisticsMedicineEconometricsComputer scienceEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Surveys of chronic health conditions provide information about prevalence but not incidence and the process of change within the population. Our study shows how "age dynamics" of chronic conditions – the probabilities of contracting conditions at different ages, of moving from one chronic condition state to another, and of dying – can be inferred from prevalence data for those conditions that can be viewed as irreversible. Transition probability matrices are constructed for successive age groups, with the sequence representing the age dynamics of the health conditions for a stationary population. We simulate the life path of a cohort under the initial probabilities, and again under altered probabilities, to explore the effects of reducing the incidence or mortality rate associated with a particular condition. We show that such surveys of chronic conditions can be made even more valuable by allowing the calculation of the transition probabilities that define the chronic conditions aging process.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.072

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations4
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal on Aging / La Revue canadienne du vieillissementSame topicInsurance, Mortality, Demography, Risk ManagementFrench-language works237,207