ArticleComputer methods and programs in biomedicine2020
Survival estimation through the cumulative hazard with monotone natural cubic splines using convex optimization-the HCNS approach.
Article in Computer methods and programs in biomedicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Circulating microRNA Panel for Prediction of Recurrence and Survival in Early-Stage Lung Adenocarcinoma.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
- Statistical assessment of the prognostic and the predictive value of biomarkers-A biomarker assessment framework with applications to traumatic brain injury biomarker studies.Research methods in medicine & health sciences · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesIn survival analysis both the Kaplan-Meier estimate and the Cox model enjoy a broad acceptance. We present an improved spline-based survival estimate and offer a fully automated software for its implementation. We explore the use of natural cubic splines that are constrained to be monotone. Apart from its superiority over the Kaplan Meier estimator our approach overcomes limitations of other known smoothing approaches and can accommodate covariates. Unlike other spline methods, concerns of computational problems and issues of overfitting are resolved since no attempt is made to maximize a likelihood once the Kaplan-Meier estimator is obtained. An application to laryngeal cancer data, a simulation study and illustrations of the broad application of the method and its software are provided. In addition to presenting our approaches, this work contributes to bridging a communication gap between clinicians and statisticians that is often apparent in the medical literature.
methodsWe employ a two-stage approach: first obtain the stepwise cumulative hazard and then consider a natural cubic spline to smooth its steps under restrictions of monotonicity between any consecutive knots. The underlying region of monotonicity corresponds to a non-linear region that encompasses the full family of monotone third-degree polynomials. We approximate it linearly and reduce the problem to a restricted least squares one under linear restrictions. This ensures convexity. We evaluate our method through simulations against competitive traditional approaches.
resultsOur method is compared to the popular Kaplan Meier estimate both in terms of mean squared error and in terms of coverage. Over-fitting is avoided by construction, as our spline attempts to approximate the empirical estimate of the cumulative hazard itself, and is not fitted directly on the data.
conclusionsThe proposed approach will enable clinical researchers to obtain improved survival estimates and valid confidence intervals over the full spectrum of the range of the survival data. Our methods outperform conventional approaches and can be readily utilized in settings beyond survival analysis such as diagnostic testing.
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.