MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4304890846 · doi:10.1111/biom.13770

Spatial Dependence Modeling of Latent Susceptibility and Time to Joint Damage in Psoriatic Arthritis

2022· article· en· W4304890846 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Fangya Mao, Richard J. Cook

Bibliographic record

VenueBiometrics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpondyloarthritis Studies and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPsoriatic arthritisPsoriasisLatent variableJoint (building)ArthritisLatent class modelMedicineEconometricsDermatologyStatisticsMathematicsImmunologyEngineeringStructural engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Important scientific insights into chronic diseases affecting several organ systems can be gained from modeling spatial dependence of sites experiencing damage progression. We describe models and methods for studying spatial dependence of joint damage in psoriatic arthritis (PsA). Since a large number of joints may remain unaffected even among individuals with a long disease history, spatial dependence is first modeled in latent joint-specific indicators of susceptibility. Among susceptible joints, a Gaussian copula is adopted for dependence modeling of times to damage. Likelihood and composite likelihoods are developed for settings, where individuals are under intermittent observation and progression times are subject to type K interval censoring. Two-stage estimation procedures help mitigate the computational burden arising when a large number of processes (i.e., joints) are under consideration. Simulation studies confirm that the proposed methods provide valid inference, and an application to the motivating data from the University of Toronto Psoriatic Arthritis Clinic yields important insights which can help physicians distinguish PsA from arthritic conditions with different dependence patterns.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.454
Threshold uncertainty score0.372

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiometricsSame topicSpondyloarthritis Studies and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207