Independence conditions and the analysis of life history studies with intermittent observation
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Multistate models provide a powerful framework for the analysis of life history processes when the goal is to characterize transition intensities, transition probabilities, state occupancy probabilities, and covariate effects thereon. Data on such processes are often only available at random visit times occurring over a finite period. We formulate a joint multistate model for the life history process, the recurrent visit process, and a random loss to follow-up time at which the visit process terminates. This joint model is helpful when discussing the independence conditions necessary to justify the use of standard likelihoods involving the life history model alone and provides a basis for analyses that accommodate dependence. We consider settings with disease-driven visits and routinely scheduled visits and develop likelihoods that accommodate partial information on the types of visits. Simulation studies suggest that suitably constructed joint models can yield consistent estimates of parameters of interest even under dependent visit processes, providing the models are correctly specified; identifiability and estimability issues are also discussed. An application is given to a cohort of individuals attending a rheumatology clinic where interest lies in progression of joint damage.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it