MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2744856250 · doi:10.1002/sim.7427

Bayesian analysis of pair‐matched case‐control studies subject to outcome misclassification

2017· article· en· W2744856250 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueStatistics in Medicine · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
Canadian institutionsBritish Columbia Centre of Excellence for Women's HealthVancouver Coastal HealthUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Multiple Sclerosis Society
KeywordsOutcome (game theory)Bayesian probabilityComputer scienceSubject (documents)StatisticsEconometricsArtificial intelligenceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We examine the impact of nondifferential outcome misclassification on odds ratios estimated from pair-matched case-control studies and propose a Bayesian model to adjust these estimates for misclassification bias. The model relies on access to a validation subgroup with confirmed outcome status for all case-control pairs as well as prior knowledge about the positive and negative predictive value of the classification mechanism. We illustrate the model's performance on simulated data and apply it to a database study examining the presence of ten morbidities in the prodromal phase of multiple sclerosis.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.045
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.531
Threshold uncertainty score0.963

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.045
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.171
GPT teacher head0.490
Teacher spread0.319 · 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