MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2442085826 · doi:10.1007/978-1-59745-385-1_4

Modeling Longitudinal Data, II: Standard Regression Models and Extensions

2008· review· en· W2442085826 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

VenueMethods in molecular biology · 2008
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLongitudinal dataOutcome (game theory)Generalized linear modelLinear regressionRegression analysisStatisticsLinear modelGeneralized linear mixed modelRegressionMixed modelEconometricsComputer scienceMathematicsData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In longitudinal studies, the relationship between exposure and disease can be measured once or multiple times while participants are monitored over time. Traditional regression techniques are used to model outcome data when each epidemiological unit is observed once. These models include generalized linear models for quantitative continuous, discrete, or qualitative outcome responses and models for time-to-event data. When data come from the same subjects or group of subjects, observations are not independent and the underlying correlation needs to be addressed in the analysis. Under these circumstances, extended models are necessary to handle complexities related to clustered data and repeated measurements of time-varying predictors or outcomes.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.847
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.367
GPT teacher head0.567
Teacher spread0.200 · 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