ArticleJournal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics2016
Application of a hazard-based visual predictive check to evaluate parametric hazard models.
Article in Journal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Interplay among malnutrition, chemoprevention, and the risk of malaria in young Ugandan children: Longitudinal pharmacodynamic and growth analysis.CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology · 2023Trial
- An evaluation of overall survival in patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia and the relationship with glasdegib treatment and exposure.Cancer chemotherapy and pharmacology · 2020Trial
- Model-Informed Dose Optimization of Pazopanib in Real-World Patients with Cancer.Clinical pharmacokinetics · 2025Article
- Finding the right hazard function for time-to-event modeling: A tutorial and Shiny application.CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology · 2022Article
- Prognostic modeling of predictive maintenance with survival analysis for mobile work equipment.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Development and performance of npde for the evaluation of time-to-event models.Pharmaceutical research · 2018Article
- Kernel-Based Visual Hazard Comparison (kbVHC): a Simulation-Free Diagnostic for Parametric Repeated Time-to-Event Models.The AAPS journal · 2017Article
- Population Exposure-Response Modeling of Naloxegol in Patients With Noncancer-Related Pain and Opioid-Induced Constipation.CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Parametric models used in time to event analyses are evaluated typically by survival-based visual predictive checks (VPC). Kaplan-Meier survival curves for the observed data are compared with those estimated using model-simulated data. Because the derivative of the log of the survival curve is related to the hazard--the typical quantity modeled in parametric analysis--isolation, interpretation and correction of deficiencies in the hazard model determined by inspection of survival-based VPC's is indirect and thus more difficult. The purpose of this study is to assess the performance of nonparametric hazard estimators of hazard functions to evaluate their viability as VPC diagnostics. Histogram-based and kernel-smoothing estimators were evaluated in terms of bias of estimating the hazard for Weibull and bathtub-shape hazard scenarios. After the evaluation of bias, these nonparametric estimators were assessed as a method for VPC evaluation of the hazard model. The results showed that nonparametric hazard estimators performed reasonably at the sample sizes studied with greater bias near the boundaries (time equal to 0 and last observation) as expected. Flexible bandwidth and boundary correction methods reduced these biases. All the nonparametric estimators indicated a misfit of the Weibull model when the true hazard was a bathtub shape. Overall, hazard-based VPC plots enabled more direct interpretation of the VPC results compared to survival-based VPC plots.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26563504What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.