MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

New approach for the identification of implausible values and outliers in longitudinal childhood anthropometric data

2018· article· en· W2784306935 on OpenAlexaff
Joy Shi, Jill Korsiak, Daniel Roth

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Epidemiology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBody Composition Measurement Techniques
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of TorontoSickKids Foundation
FundersBill and Melinda Gates Foundation
KeywordsJackknife resamplingPercentileMedicineOutlierStatisticsResidualAnthropometryMathematicsInternal medicineAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: We aimed to demonstrate the use of jackknife residuals to take advantage of the longitudinal nature of available growth data in assessing potential biologically implausible values and outliers. METHODS: Artificial errors were induced in 5% of length, weight, and head circumference measurements, measured on 1211 participants from the Maternal Vitamin D for Infant Growth (MDIG) trial from birth to 24 months of age. Each child's sex- and age-standardized z-score or raw measurements were regressed as a function of age in child-specific models. Each error responsible for a biologically implausible decrease between a consecutive pair of measurements was identified based on the higher of the two absolute values of jackknife residuals in each pair. In further analyses, outliers were identified as those values beyond fixed cutoffs of the jackknife residuals (e.g., greater than +5 or less than -5 in primary analyses). Kappa, sensitivity, and specificity were calculated over 1000 simulations to assess the ability of the jackknife residual method to detect induced errors and to compare these methods with the use of conditional growth percentiles and conventional cross-sectional methods. RESULTS: Among the induced errors that resulted in a biologically implausible decrease in measurement between two consecutive values, the jackknife residual method identified the correct value in 84.3%-91.5% of these instances when applied to the sex- and age-standardized z-scores, with kappa values ranging from 0.685 to 0.795. Sensitivity and specificity of the jackknife method were higher than those of the conditional growth percentile method, but specificity was lower than for conventional cross-sectional methods. CONCLUSIONS: Using jackknife residuals provides a simple method to identify biologically implausible values and outliers in longitudinal child growth data sets in which each child contributes at least 4 serial measurements.

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)0.027
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.112
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.145

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0270.112
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.372
GPT teacher head0.478
Teacher spread0.106 · 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

Citations40
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of EpidemiologySame topicBody Composition Measurement TechniquesFrench-language works237,207