MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3135090721 · doi:10.1002/gepi.22381

Gene‐based analysis of bi‐variate survival traits via functional regressions with applications to eye diseases

2021· article· en· W3135090721 on OpenAlexaff
Bingsong Zhang, Chi‐Yang Chiu, Yuan Fang, Tian Sang, Richard J. Cook, Alexander F. Wilson, Joan E. Bailey‐Wilson, Emily Y. Chew, Momiao Xiong, Ruzong Fan

Bibliographic record

VenueGenetic Epidemiology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic Associations and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsActuaUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnivariateBivariate analysisProportional hazards modelMultivariate statisticsBiologyCorrelationSurvival analysisStatisticsHazard ratioRegressionGeneticsMathematicsConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Genetic studies of two related survival outcomes of a pleiotropic gene are commonly encountered but statistical models to analyze them are rarely developed. To analyze sequencing data, we propose mixed effect Cox proportional hazard models by functional regressions to perform gene-based joint association analysis of two survival traits motivated by our ongoing real studies. These models extend fixed effect Cox models of univariate survival traits by incorporating variations and correlation of multivariate survival traits into the models. The associations between genetic variants and two survival traits are tested by likelihood ratio test statistics. Extensive simulation studies suggest that type I error rates are well controlled and power performances are stable. The proposed models are applied to analyze bivariate survival traits of left and right eyes in the age-related macular degeneration progression.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.535
Threshold uncertainty score0.943

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.281 · 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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenetic EpidemiologySame topicGenetic Associations and EpidemiologyFrench-language works237,207