MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3094519324 · doi:10.1002/sim.8786

Spline‐based accelerated failure time model

2020· article· en· W3094519324 on OpenAlexafffund
Menglan Pang, Robert W. Platt, Tibor Schuster, Michał Abrahamowicz

Bibliographic record

VenueStatistics in Medicine · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreMcGill University
FundersFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsParametric statisticsAccelerated failure time modelCovariateComputer scienceSpline (mechanical)Proportional hazards modelParametric modelSemiparametric modelHazardStatisticsMathematicsEngineeringStructural engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The accelerated failure time (AFT) model has been suggested as an alternative to the Cox proportional hazards model. However, a parametric AFT model requires the specification of an appropriate distribution for the event time, which is often difficult to identify in real-life studies and may limit applications. A semiparametric AFT model was developed by Komárek et al based on smoothed error distribution that does not require such specification. In this article, we develop a spline-based AFT model that also does not require specification of the parametric family of event time distribution. The baseline hazard function is modeled by regression B-splines, allowing for the estimation of a variety of smooth and flexible shapes. In comprehensive simulations, we validate the performance of our approach and compare with the results from parametric AFT models and the approach of Komárek. Both the proposed spline-based AFT model and the approach of Komárek provided unbiased estimates of covariate effects and survival curves for a variety of scenarios in which the event time followed different distributions, including both simple and complex cases. Spline-based estimates of the baseline hazard showed also a satisfactory numerical stability. As expected, the baseline hazard and survival probabilities estimated by the misspecified parametric AFT models deviated from the truth. We illustrated the application of the proposed model in a study of colon cancer.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.930
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.003

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 head0.441
GPT teacher head0.461
Teacher spread0.020 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations26
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStatistics in MedicineSame topicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeFrench-language works237,207