MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3048754379 · doi:10.1287/opre.2020.2011

Patient-Type Bayes-Adaptive Treatment Plans

2021· article· en· W3048754379 on OpenAlexaff
M. Reza Skandari, Steven M. Shechter

Bibliographic record

VenueOperations Research · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHealthcare Policy and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPartially observable Markov decision processHeuristicsComputer scienceBayes' theoremMarkov decision processHealth carePopulationBayesian probabilityMedicineArtificial intelligenceMachine learningMarkov processMarkov chainMarkov modelMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Treatment decisions that explicitly consider patient heterogeneity can lower the cost of care and improve outcomes by providing the right care for the right patient at the right time. “Patient-Type Bayes-Adaptive Treatment Plans” analyzes the problem of designing ongoing treatment plans for a population with heterogeneity in disease progression and response to medical interventions. The authors create a model that learns the patient type by monitoring patient health over time and updates a patient's treatment plan according to the information gathered. The authors formulate the problem as a multivariate state space partially observable Markov decision process (POMDP). They provide structural properties of the optimal policy and develop several approximate policies and heuristics to solve the problem. As a case study, they develop a data-driven decision-analytic model to study the optimal timing of vascular access surgery for patients with progressive chronic kidney disease. They provide further policy insights that sharpen existing guidelines.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.278
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.122 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations20
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOperations ResearchSame topicHealthcare Policy and ManagementFrench-language works237,207