MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2167268972 · doi:10.1093/ije/dyu105

Avoiding blunders involving 'immortal time'

2014· article· en· W2167268972 on OpenAlexaff
James A. Hanley, Bethany J. Foster

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Epidemiology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicCOVID-19 epidemiological studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMcGill University Health CentreMontreal Children's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStatistical evidencePsychologyMedicineStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For almost two centuries, teachers have warned against errors involving what is now called ‘immortal time.’ Despite the warnings, and many examples of how to proceed correctly, this type of blunder continues to be made in a widening range of investigations. In some instances, the consequences of the error are less serious, but in others the false evidence has been used to support theories for social inequalities; to promote greater use of pharmaceuticals, medical procedures and medical practices; and to minimize occupational hazards. We use a recent example to introduce this error. We then discuss: (i) other names for it, how old it is and who tried to warn against it; (ii) how to recognize it, and why it continues to trap researchers; and (iii) some statistical ways of dealing with denominators measured in units of time rather than in numbers of persons.

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 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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.217
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
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 score0.363
Threshold uncertainty score0.790

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.217
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.315
GPT teacher head0.477
Teacher spread0.162 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations62
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of EpidemiologySame topicCOVID-19 epidemiological studiesFrench-language works237,207