MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7100027132

Analysis of Mortality in a Small Sample of Older Adults

2014· article· en· W7100027132 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLinguistics and language evolution
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSample (material)Sample size determinationAge groupsProportional hazards modelLarge sampleSurvival function
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents an analysis of mortality in a sample of 441 adults aged 55 to 85 at baseline, who were observed for eight years. Subjects living in London, Ontario, Canada, were recruited in 1987 using an approach designed to include at least 35 individuals in each of the six quinquennial age groups from 55 to 85, with roughly equal numbers of males and females. Considerable information was collected on each subject. Demographic and lifestyle data were obtained using a questionnaire, and a variety of physical measurements were taken in a laboratory. We use the well-known proportional hazards model to assess the impact of these variables on mortality and to quantify mortality rates as a function of age and sex. The variability of the latter results is examined using simulation. Since the sample size is very small by actuarial standards, we are careful about the quantitative conclusions that are made. 1 1

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.761
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicLinguistics and language evolutionFrench-language works237,207