MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2151793804 · doi:10.82308/7805

Estimating survival from partially observed data

2001· article· en· W2151793804 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Xun Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship@McGill (McGill) · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Inference
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconometricsMissing dataSurvival functionStatisticsDementiaSampling (signal processing)Function (biology)Survival analysisMedicineComputer scienceMathematicsInternal medicineDiseaseBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Often, in cross-sectional-follow-up studies, survival data are obtained from prevalent cases only. This sampling mechanism introduces length-bias. An added difficulty is that in some cases the times of onset cannot be ascertained or are recorded with great uncertainty. Such was the situation in the Canadian Study of Health and Aging, a nation wide study of dementia conducted by Health Canada during 1991 and 1996. This thesis proposes methods to estimate the survival function nonparametrically, when the data are length-biased and only partially observed. By using the "forward recurrence times" only, we show how one can overcome the difficulty caused by missing onset times, while by using the "backward recurrence times" only, one can avoid the cost and effort of follow-up. We illustrate our methods through an application to data derived from the CSHA.

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)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.112
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.110

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.112
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.261
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.104 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeScholarship@McGill (McGill)Same topicStatistical Methods and InferenceFrench-language works237,207