Conditional random slope: A new approach for estimating individual child growth velocity in epidemiological research
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Conditioning child growth measures on baseline accounts for regression to the mean (RTM). Here, we present the "conditional random slope" (CRS) model, based on a linear-mixed effects model that incorporates a baseline-time interaction term that can accommodate multiple data points for a child while also directly accounting for RTM. METHODS: In two birth cohorts, we applied five approaches to estimate child growth velocities from 0 to 12 months to assess the effect of increasing data density (number of measures per child) on the magnitude of RTM of unconditional estimates, and the correlation and concordance between the CRS and four alternative metrics. Further, we demonstrated the differential effect of the choice of velocity metric on the magnitude of the association between infant growth and stunting at 2 years. RESULTS: RTM was minimally attenuated by increasing data density for unconditional growth modeling approaches. CRS and classical conditional models gave nearly identical estimates with two measures per child. Compared to the CRS estimates, unconditional metrics had moderate correlation (r = 0.65-0.91), but poor agreement in the classification of infants with relatively slow growth (kappa = 0.38-0.78). Estimates of the velocity-stunting association were the same for CRS and classical conditional models but differed substantially between conditional versus unconditional metrics. CONCLUSION: The CRS can leverage the flexibility of linear mixed models while addressing RTM in longitudinal analyses.
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 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 | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".