MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412629587 · doi:10.1093/biomtc/ujaf082

Sparse 2-stage Bayesian meta-analysis for individualized treatments

2025· article· en· W4412629587 on OpenAlexafffund
Junwei Shen, Erica E. M. Moodie, Shirin Golchi

Bibliographic record

VenueBiometrics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods in Clinical Trials
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMcGill University Health Centre
FundersFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsCovariateBayesian probabilityComputer scienceIdentification (biology)Meta-analysisData miningMachine learningEconometricsArtificial intelligenceMedicineMathematicsInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Individualized treatment rules tailor treatments to patients based on clinical, demographic, and other characteristics. Estimation of individualized treatment rules requires the identification of individuals who benefit most from the particular treatments and thus the detection of variability in treatment effects. To develop an effective individualized treatment rule, data from multisite studies may be required due to the low power provided by smaller datasets for detecting the often small treatment-covariate interactions. However, sharing of individual-level data is sometimes constrained. Furthermore, sparsity may arise in 2 senses: different data sites may recruit from different populations, making it infeasible to estimate identical models or all parameters of interest at all sites, and the number of non-zero parameters in the model for the treatment rule may be small. To address these issues, we adopt a 2-stage Bayesian meta-analysis approach to estimate individualized treatment rules which optimize expected patient outcomes using multisite data without disclosing individual-level data beyond the sites. Simulation results demonstrate that our approach can provide consistent estimates of the parameters which fully characterize the optimal individualized treatment rule. We estimate the optimal Warfarin dose strategy using data from the International Warfarin Pharmacogenetics Consortium, where data sparsity and small treatment-covariate interaction effects pose additional statistical challenges.

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 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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.129
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.176
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.129
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.013
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.827
GPT teacher head0.624
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiometricsSame topicStatistical Methods in Clinical TrialsFrench-language works237,207