MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2582712477 · doi:10.1002/sim.7234

Estimation of parametric failure time distributions based on interval‐censored data with irregular dependent follow‐up

2017· article· en· W2582712477 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Yayuan Zhu, Jerald F. Lawless, Cecilia A. Cotton

Bibliographic record

VenueStatistics in Medicine · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Inference
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsTruncation (statistics)StatisticsObservational studyInverse probabilityEstimatorConfidence intervalParametric statisticsConfoundingMathematicsInterval (graph theory)Event (particle physics)Marginal structural modelMedicineComputer scienceEconometricsBayesian probability

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Event history studies based on disease clinic data often face several complications. Specifically, patients may visit the clinic irregularly, and the intermittent observation times could depend on disease-related variables; this can cause a failure time outcome to be dependently interval-censored. We propose a weighted estimating function approach so that dependently interval-censored failure times can be analysed consistently. A so-called inverse-intensity-of-visit weight is employed to adjust for the informative inspection times. Left truncation of failure times can also be easily handled. Additionally, in observational studies, treatment assignments are typically non-randomized and may depend on disease-related variables. An inverse-probability-of-treatment weight is applied to estimating functions to further adjust for measured confounders. Simulation studies are conducted to examine the finite sample performances of the proposed estimators. Finally, the Toronto Psoriatic Arthritis Cohort Study is used for illustration. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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)0.036
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.121
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.189

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0360.121
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.412
Teacher spread0.327 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations6
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStatistics in MedicineSame topicStatistical Methods and InferenceFrench-language works237,207