MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2998704413 · doi:10.1111/biom.13210

Estimating treatment importance in multidrug‐resistant tuberculosis using Targeted Learning: An observational individual patient data network meta‐analysis

2019· article· en· W2998704413 on OpenAlexafffund
Guanbo Wang, Mireille E. Schnitzer, Dick Menzies, Piret Viiklepp, Timothy H. Holtz, Andrea Benedetti

Bibliographic record

VenueBiometrics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTuberculosis Research and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreUniversité de MontréalMcGill University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsObservational studyEstimatorMedicineMetric (unit)TuberculosisIdentifiabilityContext (archaeology)StatisticsEconometricsMathematicsComputer scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Persons with multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) have a disease resulting from a strain of tuberculosis (TB) that does not respond to at least isoniazid and rifampicin, the two most effective anti-TB drugs. MDR-TB is always treated with multiple antimicrobial agents. Our data consist of individual patient data from 31 international observational studies with varying prescription practices, access to medications, and distributions of antibiotic resistance. In this study, we develop identifiability criteria for the estimation of a global treatment importance metric in the context where not all medications are observed in all studies. With stronger causal assumptions, this treatment importance metric can be interpreted as the effect of adding a medication to the existing treatments. We then use this metric to rank 15 observed antimicrobial agents in terms of their estimated add-on value. Using the concept of transportability, we propose an implementation of targeted maximum likelihood estimation, a doubly robust and locally efficient plug-in estimator, to estimate the treatment importance metric. A clustered sandwich estimator is adopted to compute variance estimates and produce confidence intervals. Simulation studies are conducted to assess the performance of our estimator, verify the double robustness property, and assess the appropriateness of the variance estimation approach.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.071
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.116
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.071
Threshold uncertainty score0.374

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0710.116
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.016
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.367
GPT teacher head0.423
Teacher spread0.056 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiometricsSame topicTuberculosis Research and EpidemiologyFrench-language works237,207