MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2799563584 · doi:10.1002/bimj.201700114

Modeling clustered long‐term survivors using marginal mixture cure model

2018· article· en· W2799563584 on OpenAlexafffund
Yi Niu, Lixin Song, Yufeng Liu, Yingwei Peng

Bibliographic record

VenueBiometrical Journal · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBayesian Methods and Mixture Models
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsEstimatorStatisticsCensoring (clinical trials)MathematicsMixture modelEconometricsMarginal modelRegression analysisBone marrow transplantTerm (time)Sample size determinationComputer scienceApplied mathematicsBone marrow transplantationMedicineTransplantationSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is a great deal of recent interests in modeling right-censored clustered survival time data with a possible fraction of cured subjects who are nonsusceptible to the event of interest using marginal mixture cure models. In this paper, we consider a semiparametric marginal mixture cure model for such data and propose to extend an existing generalized estimating equation approach by a new unbiased estimating equation for the regression parameters in the latency part of the model. The large sample properties of the regression effect estimators in both incidence and the latency parts are established. The finite sample properties of the estimators are studied in simulation studies. The proposed method is illustrated with a bone marrow transplantation data and a tonsil cancer data.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.071
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.265 · 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

Citations8
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiometrical JournalSame topicBayesian Methods and Mixture ModelsFrench-language works237,207