Parametric models for combined failure time data from an incident cohort study and a prevalent cohort study with follow-up
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
A classical problem in survival analysis is to estimate the failure time distribution from right-censored observations obtained from an incident cohort study. Frequently, however, failure time data comprise two independent samples, one from an incident cohort study and the other from a prevalent cohort study with follow-up, which is known to produce length-biased observed failure times. There are drawbacks to each of these two types of study when viewed separately. We address two main questions here: (i) Can our statistical inference be enhanced by combining data from an incident cohort study with data from a prevalent cohort study with follow-up? (ii) What statistical methods are appropriate for these combined data? The theory we develop to address these questions is based on a parametrically defined failure time distribution and is supported by simulations. We apply our methods to estimate the duration of hospital stays.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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