MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2996427170 · doi:10.1002/cjs.11528

Semiparametric regression methods for temporal processes subject to multiple sources of censoring

2019· article· en· W2996427170 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Statistics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Inference
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsCensoring (clinical trials)StatisticsInverse probability weightingEstimatorRegression analysisInverse probabilityWeightingRegressionRegression diagnosticMathematicsSemiparametric regressionProportional hazards modelEconometricsComputer sciencePolynomial regression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Process regression methodology is underdeveloped relative to the frequency with which pertinent data arise. In this article, the response is a binary indicator process representing the joint event of being alive and remaining in a specific state. The process is indexed by time (e.g., time since diagnosis) and observed continuously. Data of this sort occur frequently in the study of chronic disease. A general area of application involves a recurrent event with non-negligible duration (e.g., hospitalization and associated length of hospital stay) and subject to a terminating event (e.g., death). We propose a semiparametric multiplicative model for the process version of the probability of being alive and in the (transient) state of interest. Under the proposed methods, the regression parameter is estimated through a procedure that does not require estimating the baseline probability. Unlike the majority of process regression methods, the proposed methods accommodate multiple sources of censoring. In particular, we derive a computationally convenient variant of inverse probability of censoring weighting based on the additive hazards model. We show that the regression parameter estimator is asymptotically normal, and that the baseline probability function estimator converges to a Gaussian process. Simulations demonstrate that our estimators have good finite sample performance. We apply our method to national end-stage liver disease data.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.040
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.705
Threshold uncertainty score0.968

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.040
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.123
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.279 · 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