ArticleBiostatistics (Oxford, England)2023
An online framework for survival analysis: reframing Cox proportional hazards model for large data sets and neural networks.
Article in Biostatistics (Oxford, England), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Sports participation and obesity incidence in chinese adolescents: a 7-year prospective cohort study.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Mini-batch Estimation for Deep Cox Models: Statistical Foundations and Practical Guidance.Journal of the American Statistical Association · 2026Article
- Decoding ascitic immunological niches with multi-modal machine learning reveals prognostic and chemoresistant determinants in ovarian cancer.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Article
- A framework for leveraging machine learning tools to estimate personalized survival curves.Journal of computational and graphical statistics : a joint publication of American Statistical Association, Institute of Mathematical Statistics, Interface Foundation of North America · 2024Article
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
In many biomedical applications, outcome is measured as a "time-to-event" (e.g., disease progression or death). To assess the connection between features of a patient and this outcome, it is common to assume a proportional hazards model and fit a proportional hazards regression (or Cox regression). To fit this model, a log-concave objective function known as the "partial likelihood" is maximized. For moderate-sized data sets, an efficient Newton-Raphson algorithm that leverages the structure of the objective function can be employed. However, in large data sets this approach has two issues: (i) The computational tricks that leverage structure can also lead to computational instability; (ii) The objective function does not naturally decouple: Thus, if the data set does not fit in memory, the model can be computationally expensive to fit. This additionally means that the objective is not directly amenable to stochastic gradient-based optimization methods. To overcome these issues, we propose a simple, new framing of proportional hazards regression: This results in an objective function that is amenable to stochastic gradient descent. We show that this simple modification allows us to efficiently fit survival models with very large data sets. This also facilitates training complex, for example, neural-network-based, models with survival data.
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.