MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2646223782 · doi:10.1177/0962280217712088

Functional principal component analysis of glomerular filtration rate curves after kidney transplant

2017· article· en· W2646223782 on OpenAlexaff
Jianghu Dong, Liangliang Wang, Jagbir Gill, Jiguo Cao

Bibliographic record

VenueStatistical Methods in Medical Research · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBayesian Methods and Mixture Models
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFunctional principal component analysisRenal functionPrincipal component analysisFunctional data analysisFiltration (mathematics)Kidney transplantKidney transplantationFunction (biology)KidneyUrologyMedicineInternal medicineMathematicsBiologyStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article is motivated by some longitudinal clinical data of kidney transplant recipients, where kidney function progression is recorded as the estimated glomerular filtration rates at multiple time points post kidney transplantation. We propose to use the functional principal component analysis method to explore the major source of variations of glomerular filtration rate curves. We find that the estimated functional principal component scores can be used to cluster glomerular filtration rate curves. Ordering functional principal component scores can detect abnormal glomerular filtration rate curves. Finally, functional principal component analysis can effectively estimate missing glomerular filtration rate values and predict future glomerular filtration rate values.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.117
GPT teacher head0.495
Teacher spread0.378 · 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

Citations31
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStatistical Methods in Medical ResearchSame topicBayesian Methods and Mixture ModelsFrench-language works237,207