Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39188581›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in epidemiology2024

Pitfalls in time-to-event analysis of registry data: a tutorial based on simulated and real cases.

Mickaël Alligon, Nizar Mahlaoui, Olivier Bouaziz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in epidemiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
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.

Mickaël AlligonFrench National Reference Center for Primary Immune Deficiencies (CEREDIH), Necker Enfants Malades University Hospital, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (APHP), Paris, France.
Nizar MahlaouiFrench National Reference Center for Primary Immune Deficiencies (CEREDIH), Necker Enfants Malades University Hospital, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (APHP), Paris, France.
Olivier BouazizUniversité Paris Cité, CNRS, MAP5, Paris, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Survival analysis (also referred to as time-to-event analysis) is the study of the time elapsed from a starting date to some event of interest. In practice, these analyses can be challenging and, if methodological errors are to be avoided, require the application of appropriate techniques. By using simulations and real-life data based on the French national registry of patients with primary immunodeficiencies (CEREDIH), we sought to highlight the basic elements that need to be handled correctly when performing the initial steps in a survival analysis. We focused on non-parametric methods to deal with right censoring, left truncation, competing risks, and recurrent events. Our simulations show that ignoring these aspects induces a bias in the results; we then explain how to analyze the data correctly in these situations using non-parametric methods. Rare disease registries are extremely valuable in medical research. We discuss the application of appropriate methods for the analysis of time-to-event from the CEREDIH registry. The objective of this tutorial article is to provide clinicians and healthcare professionals with better knowledge of the issues facing them when analyzing time-to-event data.

Indexed as

competing risk analysisleft truncation and right censoringprimary immunodeficienciesrare diseasesrecurrent event analysisregistriessurvival analysistime-to-event analysis

Identifiers

PMID39188581
PMCPMC11345615

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.