ReviewLifetime data analysis2019
Parametric estimation of association in bivariate failure-time data subject to competing risks: sensitivity to underlying assumptions.
Review in Lifetime data analysis, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
There has arisen a considerable body of research addressing the estimation of association between paired failure times in the presence of competing risks. In a 2002 paper, Bandeen-Roche and Liang proposed the conditional cause-specific hazard ratio (CCSHR) as a measure of this association and a parametric method by which to estimate it. The method features an interpretable decomposition of the CCSHR into factors describing the association between a pair's times to first failure among multiple failure causes and the association in pair members' propensities to fail due to a common cause. There were indications of sensitivity to model assumptions, however, in the 2002 work. Here we report a detailed study of the method's sensitivity to its parametric assumptions. We conclude that the method's performance is most sensitive to mis-specification of temporality in the association between pair members' first-failure times and of correlation between propensity to fail early or late and the propensity to fail of a specific cause. Implications for methods development are highlighted.
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.