ArticleStatistics in medicine2016
Three measures of explained variation for correlated survival data under the proportional hazards mixed-effects model.
Article in Statistics in medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Fast Variational Bayesian Inference for Correlated Survival Data: An Application to Invasive Mechanical Ventilation Duration Analysis.Statistics in medicine · 2025Article
- Concentration and genetic regulation of sex hormone binding globulin and fracture risk in older women.Climacteric : the journal of the International Menopause Society · 2025Article
- Prognostic Utility of Tumor Stage versus American Thyroid Association Risk Class in Thyroid Cancer.The Laryngoscope · 2023Article
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
Abstract
Measures of explained variation are useful in scientific research, as they quantify the amount of variation in an outcome variable of interest that is explained by one or more other variables. We develop such measures for correlated survival data, under the proportional hazards mixed-effects model. Because different approaches have been studied in the literature outside the classical linear regression model, we investigate three measures R(2) , Rres2, and ρ(2) that quantify three different population coefficients. We show that although the three population measures are not the same, they reflect similar amounts of variation explained by the predictors. Among the three measures, we show that R(2) , which is the simplest to compute, is also consistent for the first population measure under the usual asymptotic scenario when the number of clusters tends to infinity. The other two measures, on the other hand, all require that in addition the cluster sizes be large. We study the properties of the measures both analytically and through simulation studies. We illustrate their different usage on a multi-center clinical trial and a recurrent events data set. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.