MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3021772758 · doi:10.1093/biostatistics/kxy075

Sequence kernel association test for survival outcomes in the presence of a non-susceptible fraction

2018· article· en· W3021772758 on OpenAlexafffund
Lajmi Lakhal‐Chaieb, Jacques Simard, Shelley B. Bull

Bibliographic record

VenueBiostatistics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic Associations and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research InstituteUniversity of TorontoSinai Health SystemUniversité Laval
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSequence (biology)Association (psychology)Fraction (chemistry)StatisticsTest (biology)Kernel (algebra)Computer scienceMathematicsPsychologyBiologyGeneticsCombinatoricsChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this work, we propose a single nucleotide polymorphism set association test for survival phenotypes in the presence of a non-susceptible fraction. We consider a mixture model with a logistic regression for the susceptibility indicator and a proportional hazards regression to model survival in the susceptible group. We propose a joint test to assess the significance of the genetic variant in both logistic and survival regressions simultaneously. We adopt the spirit of SKAT and conduct a variance-component test treating the genetic effects of multiple variants as random. We derive score-type test statistics, and we investigate several approaches to compute their $p$-values. The finite-sample properties of the proposed tests are assessed and compared to existing approaches by simulations and their use is illustrated through an application to ovarian cancer data from the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1 and BRCA2.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.059
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.059
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.304 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations6
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiostatisticsSame topicGenetic Associations and EpidemiologyFrench-language works237,207