An Overview of R in Health Decision Sciences
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
As the complexity of health decision science applications increases, high-level programming languages are increasingly adopted for statistical analyses and numerical computations. These programming languages facilitate sophisticated modeling, model documentation, and analysis reproducibility. Among the high-level programming languages, the statistical programming framework R is gaining increased recognition. R is freely available, cross-platform compatible, and open source. A large community of users who have generated an extensive collection of well-documented packages and functions supports it. These functions facilitate applications of health decision science methodology as well as the visualization and communication of results. Although R's popularity is increasing among health decision scientists, methodological extensions of R in the field of decision analysis remain isolated. The purpose of this article is to provide an overview of existing R functionality that is applicable to the various stages of decision analysis, including model design, input parameter estimation, and analysis of model outputs.
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 | 0.038 | 0.319 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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