A novel approach for analyzing data on recurrent events with duration to estimate the combined cumulative rate of both variables over time
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recurrent adverse events, once occur often continue for some duration of time in clinical trials; and the number of events along with their durations is clinically considered as a measure of severity of a disease under study. While there are methods available for analyzing recurrent events or durations or for analyzing both side by side, no effort has been made so far to combine them and present as a single measure. However, this single-valued combined measure may help clinicians assess the wholesome effect of recurrence of incident comprising events and durations. Non-parametric approach is adapted here to develop an estimator for estimating the combined rate of both, the recurrence of events as well as the event-continuation, that is the duration per event. The proposed estimator produces a single numerical value, the interpretation and meaningfulness of which are discussed through the analysis of a real-life clinical dataset. The algebraic expression of variance is derived, asymptotic normality of the estimator is noted, and demonstration is provided on how the estimator can be used in the setup of testing of statistical hypothesis. Further possible development of the estimator is also noted, to adjust for the dependence of event occurrences on the history of the process generating recurrent events through covariates and for the case of dependent censoring.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.018 | 0.046 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".