Bootstrap adjusted predictive classification for identification of subgroups with differential treatment effects under generalized linear models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Predictive classification considered in this paper concerns the problem of identifying subgroups based on a continuous biomarker through estimation of an unknown cutpoint and assessing whether these subgroups differ in treatment effect relative to some clinical outcome. The problem is considered under a generalized linear model framework for clinical outcomes and formulated as testing the significance of the interaction between the treatment and the subgroup indicator. When the main effect of the subgroup indicator does not exist, the cutpoint is non-identifiable under the null. Existing procedures are not adaptive to the identifiability issue, and do not work well when the main effect is small. In this work, we propose profile score-type and Wald-type test statistics, and further m-out-of-n bootstrap techniques to obtain their critical values. The proposed procedures do not rely on the knowledge about the model identifiability, and we establish their asymptotic size validity and study the power under local alternatives in both cases. Further, we show that the standard bootstrap is inconsistent for the non-identifiable case. Simulation results corroborate our theory, and the proposed method is applied to a dataset from a clinical trial on advanced colorectal cancer.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".