MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4319836254 · doi:10.1080/03610926.2023.2166790

Doubly weighted mean score estimating functions with a partially observed effect modifier

2023· article· en· W4319836254 on OpenAlexafffund
Meaghan S. Cuerden, Liqun Diao, Cecilia A. Cotton, Richard J. Cook

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunication in Statistics- Theory and Methods · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Causal Inference Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooLondon Health Sciences Centre
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsPropensity score matchingEstimatorCausal inferenceInverse probabilityObservational studyStatisticsMathematicsConfoundingImputation (statistics)Inverse probability weightingMissing dataInferenceMedicineEconometricsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceBayesian probabilityPosterior probability

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Effect modification plays a central role in stratified medicine, of which the goal is often to find biomarker profiles that identify individuals who benefit from a treatment of interest. We consider the problem of causal inference regarding the effect modifying role of a biomarker, which is only available for some individuals in an observational study. We develop inverse probability weighted mean score estimating functions with one weight to account for confounding and a second weight for the missing data process. An iterative approach is described for solving the equations in the spirit of the expectation-maximization algorithm, and large sample properties of the resulting estimator are developed. Simulation studies are conducted to compare the proposed method with a doubly weighted complete case analysis and a propensity score weighted multiple imputation approach. An application to a study of the effect of a biologic therapy on inflammation in a rheumatology cohort is given for illustration.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.104
Threshold uncertainty score0.675

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.259
GPT teacher head0.496
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCommunication in Statistics- Theory and MethodsSame topicAdvanced Causal Inference TechniquesFrench-language works237,207