Accelerated failure time models with covariates subject to measurement error
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It has been well known that ignoring measurement error may result in substantially biased estimates in many contexts including linear and nonlinear regressions. For survival data with measurement error in covariates there has been extensive discussion in the literature with the focus being on the Cox proportional hazards models. However, the impact of measurement error on accelerated failure time (AFT) models has received little attention, though AFT models are very useful in survival data analysis. In this paper, we discuss AFT models with error-prone covariates and study the bias induced by the naive approach of ignoring measurement error in covariates. To adjust for such a bias, we describe a simulation and extrapolation method. This method is appealing because it is simple to implement and it does not require modelling the true but error-prone covariate process that is often not observable. Asymptotic normality for the resulting estimators is established. Simulation studies are carried out to evaluate the performance of the proposed method as well as the impact of ignoring measurement error in covariates. The proposed method is applied to analyse a data set arising from the Busselton Health study (Australian J. Public Health 1994; 18:129-135).
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it