Bayesian latent multi‐state modeling for nonequidistant longitudinal electronic health records
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
Large amounts of longitudinal health records are now available for dynamic monitoring of the underlying processes governing the observations. However, the health status progression across time is not typically observed directly: records are observed only when a subject interacts with the system, yielding irregular and often sparse observations. This suggests that the observed trajectories should be modeled via a latent continuous-time process potentially as a function of time-varying covariates. We develop a continuous-time hidden Markov model to analyze longitudinal data accounting for irregular visits and different types of observations. By employing a specific missing data likelihood formulation, we can construct an efficient computational algorithm. We focus on Bayesian inference for the model: this is facilitated by an expectation-maximization algorithm and Markov chain Monte Carlo methods. Simulation studies demonstrate that these approaches can be implemented efficiently for large data sets in a fully Bayesian setting. We apply this model to a real cohort where patients suffer from chronic obstructive pulmonary disease with the outcome being the number of drugs taken, using health care utilization indicators and patient characteristics as covariates.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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