MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2803815837 · doi:10.1007/s10985-018-9430-y

The effect of omitted covariates in marginal and partially conditional recurrent event analyses

2018· article· en· W2803815837 on OpenAlexafffund
Yujie Zhong, Richard J. Cook

Bibliographic record

VenueLifetime Data Analysis · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Causal Inference Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersMedical Research CouncilNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMarginal modelEconometricsCovariateCensoring (clinical trials)StatisticsCausal inferenceConditional probability distributionEvent (particle physics)Multiplicative functionInferenceMarginal structural modelConfoundingSemiparametric regressionMathematicsComputer scienceRegression analysisNonparametric statisticsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There have been many advances in statistical methodology for the analysis of recurrent event data in recent years. Multiplicative semiparametric rate-based models are widely used in clinical trials, as are more general partially conditional rate-based models involving event-based stratification. The partially conditional model provides protection against extra-Poisson variation as well as event-dependent censoring, but conditioning on outcomes post-randomization can induce confounding and compromise causal inference. The purpose of this article is to examine the consequences of model misspecification in semiparametric marginal and partially conditional rate-based analysis through omission of prognostic variables. We do so using estimating function theory and empirical studies.

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)0.137
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.373
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.137
Threshold uncertainty score0.723

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1370.373
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.004
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.005
Scholarly communication0.0020.005
Open science0.0040.004
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.127
GPT teacher head0.474
Teacher spread0.347 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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 venueLifetime Data AnalysisSame topicAdvanced Causal Inference TechniquesFrench-language works237,207