MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4327860460 · doi:10.1017/9781108917919.010

Case Studies of Adaptive Trial Designs

2023· book-chapter· en· W4327860460 on OpenAlexaff
Jay Park, Edward J. Mills, J. Kyle Wathen

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2023
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods in Clinical Trials
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdaptive designPresentation (obstetrics)Computer scienceComprehensionComplement (music)Clinical trialResearch designManagement sciencePsychologyMedicineEngineeringSociologySocial sciencePathologyProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this chapter, we review six case studies of adaptive clinical trials. This chapter is intended to complement the previous chapters. We have organised the case studies by their main adaptive design feature. Each case study describes the background of individual trial and summarises key design details and overall results. Our presentation and discussion do not necessarily represent the official view of the trial investigators. Our discussion is intended to improve the reader’s general literacy and comprehension of published results of adaptive clinical trials.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.239
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.766
GPT teacher head0.487
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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCambridge University Press eBooksSame topicStatistical Methods in Clinical TrialsFrench-language works237,207