On Modelling Minimal Disease Activity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To explore methods for statistical modelling of minimal disease activity (MDA) based on data from intermittent clinic visits. METHODS: The analysis was based on a 2-state model. Comparisons were made between analyses based on "complete case" data from visits at which MDA status was known, and the use of hidden model methodology that incorporated information from visits at which only some MDA defining criteria could be established. Analyses were based on an observational psoriatic arthritis cohort. RESULTS: With data from 856 patients and 7,024 clinic visits, analysis was based on virtually all visits, although only 62.6% provided enough information to determine MDA status. Estimated mean times for an episode of MDA varied from 4.18 years to 3.10 years, with smaller estimates derived from the hidden 2-state model analysis. Over a 10-year period, the estimated expected times spent in MDA episodes of longer than 1 year was 3.90 to 4.22, and the probability of having such an MDA episode was estimated to be 0.85 to 0.91, with longer times and greater probabilities seen with the hidden 2-state model analysis. CONCLUSION: A 2-state model provides a useful framework for the analysis of MDA. Use of data from visits at which MDA status can not be determined provide more precision, and notable differences are seen in estimated quantities related to MDA episodes based on complete case and hidden 2-state model analyses. The possibility of bias, as well as loss of precision, should be recognized when complete case analyses are used.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.018 | 0.062 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".