MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2271845266 · doi:10.1093/biostatistics/kxv042

Sieve estimation in a Markov illness-death process under dual censoring

2015· article· en· W2271845266 on OpenAlexafffund
Audrey Boruvka, Richard J. Cook

Bibliographic record

VenueBiostatistics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Inference
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsCensoring (clinical trials)EstimatorStatisticsInferenceSieve (category theory)Imputation (statistics)Markov chainMathematicsComputer scienceParametric statisticsEconometricsMissing dataArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Semiparametric methods are well established for the analysis of a progressive Markov illness-death process observed up to a noninformative right censoring time. However, often the intermediate and terminal events are censored in different ways, leading to a dual censoring scheme. In such settings, unbiased estimation of the cumulative transition intensity functions cannot be achieved without some degree of smoothing. To overcome this problem, we develop a sieve maximum likelihood approach for inference on the hazard ratio. A simulation study shows that the sieve estimator offers improved finite-sample performance over common imputation-based alternatives and is robust to some forms of dependent censoring. The proposed method is illustrated using data from cancer trials.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.049
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.072

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.049
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.150
GPT teacher head0.419
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations18
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiostatisticsSame topicStatistical Methods and InferenceFrench-language works237,207