MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4366198729 · doi:10.1002/bimj.202100368

Mean residual life cure models for right‐censored data with and without length‐biased sampling

2023· article· en· W4366198729 on OpenAlexafffund
Chyong‐Mei Chen, Hsin‐Jen Chen, Yingwei Peng

Bibliographic record

VenueBiometrical Journal · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Inference
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMinistry of Science and Technology, Taiwan
KeywordsCovariateStatisticsResidualMathematicsConsistency (knowledge bases)Estimating equationsLogistic regressionAsymptotic distributionEconometricsEstimatorAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose a semiparametric mean residual life mixture cure model for right-censored survival data with a cured fraction. The model employs the proportional mean residual life model to describe the effects of covariates on the mean residual time of uncured subjects and the logistic regression model to describe the effects of covariates on the cure rate. We develop estimating equations to estimate the proposed cure model for the right-censored data with and without length-biased sampling, the latter is often found in prevalent cohort studies. In particular, we propose two estimating equations to estimate the effects of covariates in the cure rate and a method to combine them to improve the estimation efficiency. The consistency and asymptotic normality of the proposed estimates are established. The finite sample performance of the estimates is confirmed with simulations. The proposed estimation methods are applied to a clinical trial study on melanoma and a prevalent cohort study on early-onset type 2 diabetes mellitus.

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)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.037
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.088

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.037
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.410
GPT teacher head0.455
Teacher spread0.045 · 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 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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiometrical JournalSame topicStatistical Methods and InferenceFrench-language works237,207