MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2125748810 · doi:10.82308/16725

Stationarity in a prevalent cohort study with follow-up

2005· article· en· W2125748810 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship@McGill (McGill) · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEstimatorStatisticsIncidence (geometry)MathematicsNonparametric statisticsEconometricsConfidence intervalCohortAsymptotic distributionConstant (computer programming)Computer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In a prevalent cohort study with follow-up, the incidence process is not directly observed since only the onset times of prevalent cases can be ascertained. Several important consequences follow if one can establish stationarity of the incidence process: (1) The useful epidemiological relationship between prevalence, incidence, and mean duration holds, (2) There is improved efficiency when estimating the underlying survivor function from a prevalent cohort study with follow-up, (3) The constancy of the incidence rate is established, and (4) The constant incidence rate can be estimated using data from a prevalent cohort study. We propose a formal test for stationarity using data from a prevalent cohort study with follow-up, and establish new characterizations of stationarity, and of useful types of departure from stationarity. A dual to the problem of establishing stationarity by comparing the backward and forward recurrence times is addressed. Assuming stationarity of the underlying incidence process, we use the backward and forward recurrence times to verify whether the underlying survival distribution is independent of the date of onset. In doing so, we characterize specific types of dependence of the underlying survival distribution on calendar time. If the data are consistent with stationarity of the incidence rate, then a natural next step is to estimate the (constant) incidence rate. We derive the nonparametric maximum likelihood estimator of the constant incidence rate, prove that the estimator is weakly consistent, and show how one may construct an asymptotic confidence interval for the incidence rate. One main advantage of our procedure is that it only requires the completion of a single prevalent cohort study with follow-up. We apply our test for stationarity to data obtained as part of the Canadian Study of Health and Aging to verify that the incidence rate of dementia amongst the elderly in Canada has remained constant. Upon concluding that this constancy is, plausible, we estimate the incidence rate.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.212
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.279 · 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