MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Bayesian logistic regression and its application for hypothyroid prediction in post-radiation nasopharyngeal cancer patients

2021· article· en· W3122531826 on OpenAlexaff
P A Lukman, Sarini Abdullah, Andhika Rachman

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physics Conference Series · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHead and Neck Cancer Studies
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersUniversitas Indonesia
KeywordsStatisticsLogistic regressionBayesian linear regressionBayesian probabilityMarkov chain Monte CarloGibbs samplingCategorical variableNasopharyngeal cancerMathematicsRegression analysisBayesian inferenceNasopharyngeal carcinomaRadiation therapyMedicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Logistic regression models are commonly used to model response variables in the form of categorical variables with several predictor variables. The contribution of the predictor variable to the response variable is expressed through a regression coefficient ( β ). Therefore, it is necessary to estimate β . This study discusses the estimation of β using the Bayesian method. Bayesian approach utilizes a combination of information from sample data and prior information about the characteristics of the parameters of interest, resulting in the updated information, namely the posterior. Bayesian method thus can overcome the problem if the quality of the sample data does not support observation. Bayesian logistic regression method will be used in analyzing post-radiation nasopharyngeal cancer (NPC) patient data, using measurement on Zulewski’s score components. Markov Chain Monte Carlo with Gibbs Sampling were used to obtain the sample from posterior distribution. Convergent estimates were obtained, and the result showed that Zulewski’s component scores only were not enough to explain the hypothyroidism in NPC. Additional information is required in order to explain the incidence of hypothyroidism in NPC.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.707
Threshold uncertainty score0.285

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations7
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physics Conference SeriesSame topicHead and Neck Cancer StudiesFrench-language works237,207