ArticleStatistics in medicine2022
Analysis of composite endpoints with component-wise censoring in the presence of differential visit schedules.
Article in Statistics in medicine, 2022. 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.
- Methodological Considerations on Relative Handgrip Strength and Cancer Risk in Older Adults.International journal of rheumatic diseases · 2026Article
- Statistical approaches for component-wise censored composite endpoints.Clinical trials (London, England) · 2024Article
- Performance of Cox regression models for composite time-to-event endpoints with component-wise censoring in randomized trials.Clinical trials (London, England) · 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
Composite endpoints are very common in clinical research, such as recurrence-free survival in oncology research, defined as the earliest of either death or disease recurrence. Because of the way data are collected in such studies, component-wise censoring is common, where, for example, recurrence is an interval-censored event and death is a right-censored event. However, a common way to analyze such component-wise censored composite endpoints is to treat them as right-censored, with the date at which the non-fatal event was detected serving as the date the event occurred. This approach is known to introduce upward bias when the Kaplan-Meier estimator is applied, but has more complex impact on semi-parametric regression approaches. In this article we compare the performance of the Cox model estimators for right-censored data and the Cox model estimators for interval-censored data in the context of component-wise censored data where the visit process differs across levels of a covariate of interest, a common scenario in observational data. We additionally examine estimators of the cause-specific hazard when applied to the individual components of such component-wise censored composite endpoints. We found that when visit schedules differed according to levels of a covariate of interest, the Cox model estimators for right-censored data and the estimators for cause-specific hazards were increasingly biased as the frequency of visits decreased. The Cox model estimator for interval-censored data with censoring at the last disease-free date is recommended for use in the presence of differential visit schedules.
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.