ArticleNan fang yi ke da xue xue bao = Journal of Southern Medical University2023
[Comparison of prediction ability of two extended Cox models in nonlinear survival data analysis].
Article in Nan fang yi ke da xue xue bao = Journal of Southern Medical University, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Machine learning prediction of tuberculosis mortality: a comparative analysis of random survival forest and cox regression models.BMC infectious diseases · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the predictive ability of two extended Cox models in nonlinear survival data analysis.
methodsThrough Monte Carlo simulation and empirical study and with the conventional Cox Proportional Hazards model and Random Survival Forests as the reference models, we compared restricted cubic spline Cox model (Cox_RCS) and DeepSurv neural network Cox model (Cox_DNN) for their prediction ability in nonlinear survival data analysis. Concordance index was used to evaluate the differentiation of the prediction results (a larger concordance index indicates a better prediction ability of the model). Integrated Brier Score was used to evaluate the calibration degree of the prediction (a smaller index indicates a better prediction ability).
resultsFor data that met requirement of the proportion risk, the Cox_RCS model had the best prediction ability regardless of the sample size or deletion rate. For data that failed to meet the proportion risk, the prediction ability of Cox_DNN was optimal for a large sample size (≥500) with a low deletion (< 40%); the prediction ability of Cox_RCS was superior to those of other models in all other scenarios. For example data, the Cox_RCS model showed the best performance.
conclusionIn analysis of nonlinear low maintenance data, Cox_RCS and Cox_DNN have their respective advantages and disadvantages in prediction. The conventional survival analysis methods are not inferior to machine learning or deep learning methods under certain conditions.
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.