MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2940434429 · doi:10.1002/sim.8152

Quantile regression and empirical likelihood for the analysis of longitudinal data with monotone missing responses due to dropout, with applications to quality of life measurements from clinical trials

2019· article· en· W2940434429 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

VenueStatistics in Medicine · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Inference
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsMissing dataEstimatorQuantileDropout (neural networks)Quantile regressionStatisticsEconometricsSkewnessRegression analysisRegressionComputer scienceMathematicsMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The analysis of quality of life (QoL) data can be challenging due to the skewness of responses and the presence of missing data. In this paper, we propose a new weighted quantile regression method for estimating the conditional quantiles of QoL data with responses missing at random. The proposed method makes use of the correlation information within the same subject from an auxiliary mean regression model to enhance the estimation efficiency and takes into account of missing data mechanism. The asymptotic properties of the proposed estimator have been studied and simulations are also conducted to evaluate the performance of the proposed estimator. The proposed method has also been applied to the analysis of the QoL data from a clinical trial on early breast cancer, which motivated this 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.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.068
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.239
Threshold uncertainty score0.940

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.068
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.649
GPT teacher head0.620
Teacher spread0.029 · 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