ArticleCommunications in statistics: theory and methods2026
Residual-Based Sieve Maximum Full Likelihood Estimation for the Proportional Hazards Model.
Article in Communications in statistics: theory and methods, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
The partial likelihood approach is the gold standard approach for estimating regression parameters in proportional hazards model, largely because it avoids specifying the baseline hazard function. However, this approach can lack robustness in the presence of model mis-specification, outliers, or high censoring rates. To address these limitations, we propose a sieve maximum full likelihood estimation method for the proportional hazards model. Our two-step procedure approximates the cumulative hazard function using piecewise polynomials, enabling simultaneous estimation of all model parameters within a single likelihood framework. Unlike the partial likelihood, our method employs the full likelihood to enhance robustness and efficiency, particularly when assumptions are violated or data are heavily censored. We use the profile likelihood to estimate variance and introduce an efficient information criterion for selecting the optimal degree of freedom for the sieve space. Extensive simulations demonstrate that our approach outperforms both partial and existing full likelihood methods under the proportional and non-proportional hazards settings. We illustrate the usefulness of the method using data from real applications in bladder and breast cancer. This approach provides a flexible alternative for survival analysis, particularly when standard methods may be insufficient due to data outliers or violation of model assumptions.
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.