MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2320372797 · doi:10.1093/biostatistics/kxt057

Monitoring risk-adjusted medical outcomes allowing for changes over time

2013· article· en· W2320372797 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBiostatistics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicAdvanced Statistical Process Monitoring
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChartComputer scienceVariety (cybernetics)Failure rateMeasure (data warehouse)Data miningStatisticsArtificial intelligenceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider the problem of monitoring and comparing medical outcomes, such as surgical performance, over time. Performance is subject to change due to a variety of reasons including patient heterogeneity, learning, deteriorating skills due to aging, etc. For instance, we expect inexperienced surgeons to improve their skills with practice. We propose a graphical method to monitor surgical performance that incorporates risk adjustment to account for patient heterogeneity. The procedure gives more weight to recent outcomes and down-weights the influence of outcomes further in the past. The chart is clinically interpretable as it plots an estimate of the failure rate for a "standard" patient. The chart also includes a measure of uncertainty in this estimate. We can implement the method using historical data or start from scratch. As the monitoring proceeds, we can base the estimated failure rate on a known risk model or use the observed outcomes to update the risk model as time passes. We illustrate the proposed method with an example from cardiac surgery.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.056
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.755
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.056
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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.103
GPT teacher head0.426
Teacher spread0.323 · 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