Sparse 2-stage Bayesian meta-analysis for individualized treatments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 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 | 0.060 | 0.104 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".