MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2128212246 · doi:10.1002/sim.4098

Mixture cure model with random effects for the analysis of a multi‐center tonsil cancer study

2010· article· en· W2128212246 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueStatistics in Medicine · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBayesian Methods and Mixture Models
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNational Cancer InstituteNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaQueen's University
KeywordsStatisticsMaximum likelihoodCovariateRandom effects modelMathematicsGaussianCure rateMixture modelCorrelationMedicineSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cure models for clustered survival data have the potential for broad applicability. In this paper, we consider the mixture cure model with random effects and propose several estimation methods based on Gaussian quadrature, rejection sampling, and importance sampling to obtain the maximum likelihood estimates of the model for clustered survival data with a cure fraction. The methods are flexible to accommodate various correlation structures. A simulation study demonstrates that the maximum likelihood estimates of parameters in the model tend to have smaller biases and variances than the estimates obtained from the existing methods. We apply the model to a study of tonsil cancer patients clustered by treatment centers to investigate the effect of covariates on the cure rate and on the failure time distribution of the uncured patients. The maximum likelihood estimates of the parameters demonstrate strong correlation among the failure times of the uncured patients and weak correlation among cure statuses in the same center.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.955
Threshold uncertainty score0.313

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.340 · 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