A Bayesian joint bent-cable model for longitudinal measurements and survival time with heterogeneous random-effects distributions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Biomarkers are measured repeatedly in clinical studies until a pre-defined endpoint, such as death from certain causes, is reached. Such repeated measurements may present a dynamic process for understanding when to expect the study's endpoint. Joint modelling is often employed to handle such a model. Typically, shared random effects are assumed to be common to both the longitudinal component and the study's endpoint. These shared random effects usually assume homogeneous and follow a normal distribution. However, identifying homogeneous subgroups is important when the underlying population is heterogeneous. This issue has received little attention in the literature, particularly for multi-phase longitudinal responses. In this paper, we propose a joint modelling approach for longitudinal and survival models using a bent-cable mixed model for longitudinal measurements and a Weibull distribution for the survival component. We also incorporate a finite mixture of normal distribution assumptions to account for the unobserved heterogeneity in the shared random effects model. A Bayesian MCMC is developed for parameter estimation and inferences. The proposed method is evaluated using simulation studies and the Tehran Lipid and Glucose Study dataset.
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 | 0.016 | 0.029 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
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".