General regression methods for respondent-driven sampling data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Respondent-driven sampling is a variant of link-tracing sampling techniques that aim to recruit hard-to-reach populations by leveraging individuals’ social relationships. As such, a respondent-driven sample has a graphical component which represents a partially observed network of unknown structure. Moreover, it is common to observe homophily, or the tendency to form connections with individuals who share similar traits. Currently, there is a lack of principled guidance on multivariate modelling strategies for respondent-driven sampling to address peer effects driven by homophily and the dependence between observations within the network. In this work, we propose a methodology for general regression techniques using respondent-driven sampling data. This is used to study the socio-demographic predictors of HIV treatment optimism (about the value of antiretroviral therapy) among gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men, recruited into a respondent-driven sampling study in Montreal, Canada.
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 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 | 0.087 | 0.481 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.013 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".