MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281786061 · doi:10.1002/psp4.12829

Evaluation of covariate effects using forest plots and introduction to the <i>coveffectsplot</i> R package

2022· article· en· W4281786061 on OpenAlexaff
Jean‐Francois Marier, Nathan S. Teuscher, Samer Mouksassi

Bibliographic record

VenueCPT Pharmacometrics & Systems Pharmacology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest ecology and management
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCovariateR packageComputer scienceVisualizationStatisticsEconometricsData miningMathematicsMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The current tutorial describes why forest plots are needed for an effective communication of covariates effects, how they are constructed, and how they should be presented. Simulation-based methodologies allowing the user to evaluate the marginal impact of changing one covariate at a time or by considering the joint effects of correlated covariates are introduced along with graphical tools for an optimal assessment of the covariate effects. The R package coveffectsplot and an associated R Shiny application are provided to facilitate the design and construction of forest plots for the visualization of covariate effects. All codes and materials are available on a public Github repository.

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)0.007
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.170
Threshold uncertainty score0.854

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.310
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations27
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCPT Pharmacometrics & Systems PharmacologySame topicForest ecology and managementFrench-language works237,207