MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2590528016 · doi:10.1111/rssc.12216

Simultaneously Modelling Clustered Marginal Counts and Multinomial Proportions with Zero Inflation with Application to Analysis of Osteoporotic Fractures Data

2017· article· en· W2590528016 on OpenAlexafffund
M. Tariqul Hasan, Gary Sneddon, Renjun Ma

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C (Applied Statistics) · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone health and osteoporosis research
Canadian institutionsMount Saint Vincent UniversityUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersDivision of Mathematical SciencesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMultinomial distributionNational Health and Nutrition Examination SurveyRandomnessOsteoporotic fractureStatisticsOsteoporosisEconometricsMedicineDemographyMathematicsEnvironmental healthPopulationInternal medicineBone mineral

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Osteoporotic fractures are known to be highly recurring. We investigate bone-dependent and bone-independent risk factors of osteoporotic fracture frequency and relative proportions at various body locations by using the data from the osteoporotic fracture study that was conducted by the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 2007–2008. We propose a new zero-inflated baseline category multinomial mixed model to characterize the clustered count responses and multinomial proportions by subject simultaneously while taking account of zero inflation and randomness of cluster sizes. Our approach gives additional insights into the risk factors of osteoporotic fracture frequencies at various body locations. This joint modelling of fracture frequency also allows us to characterize relative proportion patterns at various body locations by subject between men and women across age. These findings have clear policy relevance to appropriate osteoporotic fracture prevention and resource allocation.

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)0.052
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.149
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 score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.275

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0520.149
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.005
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0060.005
Research integrity0.0030.005
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.302 · 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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C (Applied Statistics)Same topicBone health and osteoporosis researchFrench-language works237,207