MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2801071792 · doi:10.1002/sim.7646

Tracing studies in cohorts with attrition: Selection models for efficient sampling

2018· article· en· W2801071792 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Nathalie C. Moon, Leilei Zeng, Richard J. Cook

Bibliographic record

VenueStatistics in Medicine · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLiver Disease Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsCohortEstimatorStatisticsSampling (signal processing)AttritionTracingSelection (genetic algorithm)Simple random sampleComputer scienceMedicineCohort studyEconometricsMathematicsMachine learningEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cohort studies of chronic diseases involve recruitment and longitudinal follow-up of affected individuals with a view to studying the effect of risk factors on disease progression and death. When the time to withdrawal from the cohort is conditionally independent of the disease process the primary consequence is a loss of information on the parameters of interest. This loss can sometimes be mitigated through the conduct of tracing studies in which a subsample of those lost to follow up are contacted and some information is obtained on their disease and survival status. We describe the use of selection models to sample individuals for tracing who will yield more efficient estimators than those obtained by simple random sampling. Efficient sampling schemes featuring cost constraints are also developed and shown to perform well. An application to data from the University of Toronto Psoriatic Arthritis Cohort illustrates how to apply the method in a real setting.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.310
Threshold uncertainty score0.365

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.116
GPT teacher head0.406
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations4
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStatistics in MedicineSame topicLiver Disease Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207