An efficient alternative to the stratified Cox model analysis
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Consider a typical two-treatment randomized clinical trial involving a time-to-event endpoint, with randomization stratified by a categorical prognostic factor (for example gender). At the design stage, it is often assumed that the treatment hazard ratio (HR) is constant across the strata, and the data are commonly analyzed using the stratified Cox proportional hazards model. We caution that this ubiquitous approach is needlessly risky because departures from the assumption of the HR being the same for all the strata can result in a notably biased and/or less powerful analysis. An alternative approach is proposed in which first the [log] HR is estimated separately for each stratum using an unstratified Cox model, and then the stratum-specific estimates are combined for overall inference using either sample size or 'minimum risk' stratum weights. The advantages of the proposed two-step analysis versus the common one-step stratified Cox model analysis are illustrated using simulations that were conducted to support the design of a vaccine clinical trial.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.068 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it