MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4282945871 · doi:10.1007/s44199-022-00044-2

Weighted Bayesian Poisson Regression for The Number of Children Ever Born per Woman in Bangladesh

2022· article· en· W4282945871 on OpenAlexafffund
Jabed Tomal, Jahidur Rahman Khan, Abdus S. Wahed

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Statistical Theory and Applications · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Maternal and Child Health
Canadian institutionsThompson Rivers University
FundersEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaLundbeckfondenScience and Technology Facilities CouncilUNICEF
KeywordsPoisson regressionPoisson distributionMathematicsStatisticsBayesian probabilityRegressionEconometricsRegression analysisDemographySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Number of children ever born to women of reproductive age forms a core component of fertility and is vital to the population dynamics in any country. Using Bangladesh Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey 2019 data, we fitted a novel weighted Bayesian Poisson regression model to identify multi-level individual, household, regional and societal factors of the number of children ever born among married women of reproductive age in Bangladesh. We explored the robustness of our results using multiple prior distributions, and presented the Metropolis algorithm for posterior realizations. The method is compared with regular Bayesian Poisson regression model using a Weighted Bayesian Information Criterion. Factors identified emphasize the need to revisit and strengthen the existing fertility-reduction programs and policies in Bangladesh. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s44199-022-00044-2.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.049
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.080

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.049
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.303 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Statistical Theory and ApplicationsSame topicGlobal Maternal and Child HealthFrench-language works237,207