BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Jeremy M. G. Taylor

Jeremy M. G. Taylor contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
MethodologyApplications

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 17 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
4works
0followers
2topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

4 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

Incorporating baseline covariates to validate surrogate endpoints with a constant biomarker under control arm

A surrogate endpoint S in a clinical trial is an outcome that may be measured earlier or more easily than the true outcome of interest T. In this work, we extend causal inference approaches to validate such a surrogate using potential outcomes. The causal association paradigm assesses the relationship of the treatment effect on the surrogate with the treatment effect on the true endpoint. Using the principal surrogacy criteria, we utilize the joint conditional distribution of the potential outcomes T, given the potential outcomes S. In particular, our setting of interest allows us to assume the surrogate under the placebo, S(0), is zero-valued, and we incorporate baseline covariates in the setting of normally-distributed endpoints. We develop Bayesian methods to incorporate conditional independence and other modeling assumptions and explore their impact on the assessment of surrogacy. We demonstrate our approach via simulation and data that mimics an ongoing study of a muscular dystrophy gene therapy.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Kullback-Leibler-Based Discrete Failure Time Models for Integration of Published Prediction Models with New Time-To-Event Dataset

Prediction of time-to-event data often suffers from rare event rates, small sample sizes, high dimensionality and low signal-to-noise ratios. Incorporating published prediction models from large-scale studies is expected to improve the performance of prognosis prediction on internal individual-level time-to-event data. However, existing integration approaches typically assume that underlying distributions from the external and internal data sources are similar, which is often invalid. To account for challenges including heterogeneity, data sharing, and privacy constraints, we propose a discrete failure time modeling procedure, which utilizes a discrete hazard-based Kullback-Leibler discriminatory information measuring the discrepancy between the published models and the internal dataset. Simulations show the advantage of the proposed method compared with those solely based on the internal data or published models. We apply the proposed method to improve prediction performance on a kidney transplant dataset from a local hospital by integrating this small-scale dataset with published survival models obtained from the national transplant registry.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Understanding the dynamic impact of COVID-19 through competing risk modeling with bivariate varying coefficients

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has exerted a profound impact on patients with end-stage renal disease relying on kidney dialysis to sustain their lives. Motivated by a request by the U.S. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, our analysis of their postdischarge hospital readmissions and deaths in 2020 revealed that the COVID-19 effect has varied significantly with postdischarge time and time since the onset of the pandemic. However, the complex dynamics of the COVID-19 effect trajectories cannot be characterized by existing varying coefficient models. To address this issue, we propose a bivariate varying coefficient model for competing risks within a cause-specific hazard framework, where tensor-product B-splines are used to estimate the surface of the COVID-19 effect. An efficient proximal Newton algorithm is developed to facilitate the fitting of the new model to the massive Medicare data for dialysis patients. Difference-based anisotropic penalization is introduced to mitigate model overfitting and the wiggliness of the estimated trajectories; various cross-validation methods are considered in the determination of optimal tuning parameters. Hypothesis testing procedures are designed to examine whether the COVID-19 effect varies significantly with postdischarge time and the time since pandemic onset, either jointly or separately. Simulation experiments are conducted to evaluate the estimation accuracy, type I error rate, statistical power, and model selection procedures. Applications to Medicare dialysis patients demonstrate the real-world performance of the proposed methods.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Using Multiple Imputation to Classify Potential Outcomes Subgroups

With medical tests becoming increasingly available, concerns about over-testing and over-treatment dramatically increase. Hence, it is important to understand the influence of testing on treatment selection in general practice. Most statistical methods focus on average effects of testing on treatment decisions. However, this may be ill-advised, particularly for patient subgroups that tend not to benefit from such tests. Furthermore, missing data are common, representing large and often unaddressed threats to the validity of statistical methods. Finally, it is desirable to conduct analyses that can be interpreted causally. We propose to classify patients into four potential outcomes subgroups, defined by whether or not a patient's treatment selection is changed by the test result and by the direction of how the test result changes treatment selection. This subgroup classification naturally captures the differential influence of medical testing on treatment selections for different patients, which can suggest targets to improve the utilization of medical tests. We can then examine patient characteristics associated with patient potential outcomes subgroup memberships. We used multiple imputation methods to simultaneously impute the missing potential outcomes as well as regular missing values. This approach can also provide estimates of many traditional causal quantities. We find that explicitly incorporating causal inference assumptions into the multiple imputation process can improve the precision for some causal estimates of interest. We also find that bias can occur when the potential outcomes conditional independence assumption is violated; sensitivity analyses are proposed to assess the impact of this violation. We applied the proposed methods to examine the influence of 21-gene assay, the most commonly used genomic test, on chemotherapy selection among breast cancer patients.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access