Semiparametric regression methods for temporal processes subject to multiple sources of censoring
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.015 | 0.043 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".