Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, our aim is to analyze geographical and temporal variability of disease incidence when spatio-temporal count data have excess zeros. To that end, we consider random effects in zero-inflated Poisson models to investigate geographical and temporal patterns of disease incidence. Spatio-temporal models that employ conditionally autoregressive smoothing across the spatial dimension and B-spline smoothing over the temporal dimension are proposed. The analysis of these complex models is computationally difficult from the frequentist perspective. On the other hand, the advent of the Markov chain Monte Carlo algorithm has made the Bayesian analysis of complex models computationally convenient. Recently developed data cloning method provides a frequentist approach to mixed models that is also computationally convenient. We propose to use data cloning, which yields to maximum likelihood estimation, to conduct frequentist analysis of zero-inflated spatio-temporal modeling of disease incidence. One of the advantages of the data cloning approach is that the prediction and corresponding standard errors (or prediction intervals) of smoothing disease incidence over space and time is easily obtained. We illustrate our approach using a real dataset of monthly children asthma visits to hospital in the province of Manitoba, Canada, during the period April 2006 to March 2010. Performance of our approach is also evaluated through a simulation study.
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 | 0.009 | 0.029 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".