Estimating the stochastic uncertainty underlying sample-based estimates of infant mortality in the Philippines: a first-time application to a country in the Southeast Asia/Pacific Basin region
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Infant mortality is an important population health statistic that is often used to make health policy decisions. Unfortunately, these data are not available for all populations. A newly developed method is presented for accounting for the stochastic uncertainty found in infant mortality rates (IMRs) estimated from sample surveys and for the first time applied to a country in the Southeast Asian/Pacific Basin area, the Philippines. The method is founded on the fact that there are two sources of variation in sample-based estimates of IMRs: (1) sample size; and (2) variation of infant deaths. The approach is aimed at taking into account stochastic uncertainty while preserving information concerning the uncertainty due to sampling. In applying the method to the Philippines, the sample-based IMR estimates appear to perform well in terms of accounting for stochastic uncertainty. This finding is consistent with previous research assessing this approach in Africa and with variations, in Canada, Europe and the United States, which suggests that in the form presented here or in one of its variants, it could successfully be employed not only elsewhere in the Southeast Asia/Pacific Basin region but also in East Asia, North Asia, South Asia, and West Asia.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.048 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".