MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2805002703 · doi:10.1002/bimj.201700181

A cure‐rate model for Q‐learning: Estimating an adaptive immunosuppressant treatment strategy for allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant patients

2018· article· en· W2805002703 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueBiometrical Journal · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal Transplantation Outcomes and Treatments
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMcGill University Health Centre
FundersNational Cancer InstituteNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsHematopoietic cellMedicineCure rateDiseaseCurative treatmentHaematopoiesisOncologyTransplantationBone transplantationBone marrow transplantBone marrow transplantationInternal medicineSurgeryStem cellBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cancers treated by transplantation are often curative, but immunosuppressive drugs are required to prevent and (if needed) to treat graft-versus-host disease. Estimation of an optimal adaptive treatment strategy when treatment at either one of two stages of treatment may lead to a cure has not yet been considered. Using a sample of 9563 patients treated for blood and bone cancers by allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation drawn from the Center for Blood and Marrow Transplant Research database, we provide a case study of a novel approach to Q-learning for survival data in the presence of a potentially curative treatment, and demonstrate the results differ substantially from an implementation of Q-learning that fails to account for the cure-rate.

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.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.792
Threshold uncertainty score0.776

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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.266 · 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