Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36440608›Full record

ArticleBiometrics2023

An information ratio-based goodness-of-fit test for copula models on censored data.

Tao Sun, Yu Cheng, Ying Ding

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biometrics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Tao SunCenter for Applied Statistics and School of Statistics, Renmin University of China, Beijing, China.ORCID 0000-0003-4447-3005
Yu ChengDepartment of Statistics, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-4805-203X
Ying DingDepartment of Biostatistics, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1352-1000

Funding

New statistical methods and software for modeling complex multivariate survival data with large-scale covariatesR01GM141076 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI DING, YING · 2022 to 2025
$1.2M
Deep-learning-based prediction of AMD and its progression with GWAS and fundus image dataR21EY030488 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI CHEN, WEI, DING, YING · 2020 to 2021
$408k
NEI NIH HHS R21 EY030488NEI NIH HHS R21EY030488NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM141076
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Copula is a popular method for modeling the dependence among marginal distributions in multivariate censored data. As many copula models are available, it is essential to check if the chosen copula model fits the data well for analysis. Existing approaches to testing the fitness of copula models are mainly for complete or right-censored data. No formal goodness-of-fit (GOF) test exists for interval-censored or recurrent events data. We develop a general GOF test for copula-based survival models using the information ratio (IR) to address this research gap. It can be applied to any copula family with a parametric form, such as the frequently used Archimedean, Gaussian, and D-vine families. The test statistic is easy to calculate, and the test procedure is straightforward to implement. We establish the asymptotic properties of the test statistic. The simulation results show that the proposed test controls the type-I error well and achieves adequate power when the dependence strength is moderate to high. Finally, we apply our method to test various copula models in analyzing multiple real datasets. Our method consistently separates different copula models for all these datasets in terms of model fitness.

Indexed as

Models, StatisticalComputer SimulationHumanscopulagoodness of fitinformation ratiointerval censoringrecurrent events

Identifiers

PMID36440608
PMCPMC10225017

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.