MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2761969460 · doi:10.1002/env.2478

Bayesian inference in time‐varying additive hazards models with applications to disease mapping

2017· article· en· W2761969460 on OpenAlexafffund
Alexander Chernoukhov, Abdulkadir Hussein, Sévérien Nkurunziza, Dipankar Bandyopadhyay

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmetrics · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WindsorTD Bank Group
FundersNational Institute of Dental and Craniofacial ResearchNational Cancer InstituteNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsInferenceBayesian probabilityBayesian inferenceEconometricsComputer scienceFrequentist inferenceStatisticsMathematicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Environmental health and disease mapping studies are often concerned with the evaluation of the combined effect of various socio-demographic and behavioral factors, and environmental exposures on time-to-events of interest, such as death of individuals, organisms or plants. In such studies, estimation of the hazard function is often of interest. In addition to known explanatory variables, the hazard function maybe subject to spatial/geographical variations, such that proximally located regions may experience similar hazards than regions that are distantly located. A popular approach for handling this type of spatially-correlated time-to-event data is the Cox's Proportional Hazards (PH) regression model with spatial frailties. However, the PH assumption poses a major practical challenge, as it entails that the effects of the various explanatory variables remain constant over time. This assumption is often unrealistic, for instance, in studies with long follow-ups where the effects of some exposures on the hazard may vary drastically over time. Our goal in this paper is to offer a flexible semiparametric additive hazards model (AH) with spatial frailties. Our proposed model allows both the frailties as well as the regression coefficients to be time-varying, thus relaxing the proportionality assumption. Our estimation framework is Bayesian, powered by carefully tailored posterior sampling strategies via Markov chain Monte Carlo techniques. We apply the model to a dataset on prostate cancer survival from the US state of Louisiana to illustrate its advantages.

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)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.071
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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.104

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.071
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.280 · 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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmetricsSame topicStatistical Methods and Bayesian InferenceFrench-language works237,207