MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2167921963 · doi:10.1002/cjs.11197

Nonparametric cure rate estimation with covariates

2013· article· en· W2167921963 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Jianfeng Xu, Yingwei Peng

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Statistics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods in Clinical Trials
Canadian institutionsCancer Care South EastOntario Institute for Cancer ResearchCancer Care OntarioInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesQueen's University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCovariateNonparametric statisticsCure rateEstimatorParametric statisticsStatisticsSample size determinationEconometricsMathematicsEstimationMedicineSurgeryEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We propose a nonparametric method to assess the effects of one or more covariates on the cure rate for survival data with a cure fraction. The method extends the existing work on single sample and multiple sample cases and also allows for a continuous covariate. The proposed estimator is shown to be consistent and asymptotically normal. A simulation study shows that the proposed method estimates the covariate effect on cure rate with smaller biases than the existing semi‐parametric cure models, particularly when the semi‐parametric cure models mis‐specify the effect. The proposed method is applied to a study for leukaemia patients to assess the effect of age on the chance of being cured after bone marrow transplantation. The Canadian Journal of Statistics 42: 1–17; 2014 © 2013 Statistical Society of Canada

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)0.033
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.141
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 score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.177

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0330.141
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.274
GPT teacher head0.450
Teacher spread0.176 · 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

Citations76
Published2013
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of StatisticsSame topicStatistical Methods in Clinical TrialsFrench-language works237,207