MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4401024201 · doi:10.24963/ijcai.2024/792

High-Confident Local Structure Guided Consensus Graph Learning For Incomplete Multi-view Clustering

2024· article· en· W4401024201 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Maternal and Child Health
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiscontinuationInferenceCausal inferenceComputer scienceMedicineEconometricsArtificial intelligenceMathematicsInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Discontinuation rates vary by family planning method and across socio-economic contexts. Understanding these variations and their causes is paramount for developing and implementing policies aimed at curbing discontinuation rates. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are ideal for obtaining this information, but this design can be extremely expensive and logistically complex. The ongoing collection of comprehensive data sets, such as Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS data), when combined with machine learning methods, present an alternative and relatively cost-effective means of evidence gathering for policy development. Here, we use causal inference to estimate the effect of injectable contraceptive use on discontinuation over the 12-month period that follows its adoption. To that aim, we use retrospective observational data from seven sub-Saharan African countries captured by the DHS’ Contraceptive Calendar. We use machine learning methods to characterize data regions that share common covariate support. We find that the use of injectables increased the risk of discontinuation in four of the seven countries analyzed. Consistent with existing literature, we find that concerns with the side-effects of injectables appear to be the most frequent reason for discontinuation. However, these risks decreased after adjusting for socio-economic factors. As risk estimates may not apply uniformly within populations, we characterized the sub-populations for robust estimations by their geographical region, level of unmet needs, marital status, level of education, and age of first sex.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.292 · 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
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGlobal Maternal and Child Health→French-language works237,207→