MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408655878 · doi:10.1080/02664763.2025.2481458

Zero-inflated Poisson mixed model for longitudinal count data with informative dropouts

2025· article· en· W4408655878 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Statistics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCount dataZero-inflated modelZero (linguistics)StatisticsPoisson distributionMathematicsPoisson regressionOverdispersionLongitudinal dataMixed modelQuasi-likelihoodEconometricsComputer scienceMedicineData miningPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Zero-inflated Poisson (ZIP) models are typically used for analyzing count data with excess zeros. If the data are collected longitudinally, then repeated observations from a given subject are correlated by nature. The ZIP mixed model may be used to deal with excess zeros and correlations among the repeated observations. Also, it is often the case that some follow-up measurements in a longitudinal study are missing. If the missing data are informative or nonignorable, it is necessary to incorporate a missingness mechanism into the observed likelihood function for a valid inference. In this paper, we propose and explore an efficient method for analyzing count data by addressing the complex issues of excess zeros, correlations among repeated observations, and missing responses due to dropouts. The empirical properties of the proposed estimators are studied based on Monte Carlo simulations. An application is provided using some real data obtained from a health study.

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.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.255
Threshold uncertainty score0.704

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.311 · 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