Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42444496›Full record

ArticleBiometrical journal. Biometrische Zeitschrift2026

Censoring, Competing Events, and Multistate Models: Comment on Beyersmann et al. "Hazards Constitute Key Quantities for Analyzing, Interpreting and Understanding Time-to-Event Data".

Malka Gorfine, Daniel Nevo

Abstract readComment
In one paragraph

Article in Biometrical journal. Biometrische Zeitschrift, 2026. 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

2 authors.

Malka GorfineDepartment of Statistics and Operations Research, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1577-6624
Daniel NevoDepartment of Statistics and Operations Research, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel.

Funding

Israel Science Foundation 767/21Israel Science Foundation 827/21
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Beyersmann et al. propose a functional interpretation of hazards, viewing them as evolving quantities describing the entire event process rather than as pointwise causal contrasts. In this commentary, we elaborate on the implications of this view for causal inference in modern clinical trials with survival outcomes. We emphasize how censoring, competing events, and multistate structures shape not only identifiability but also the definition and transportability of hazard-based estimands. We highlight that, even within a functional framework, censoring mechanisms may implicitly determine the statistical estimand through time-dependent weighting, with direct implications for generalizability across studies and populations. We further discuss how these issues are amplified in competing-risks and multistate settings, where causal interpretation requires careful consideration of intercurrent events and selection induced by post-randomization state occupancy.

Indexed as

BiometryModels, StatisticalData Interpretation, StatisticalHumanscausal inferencecensoringclinical trialsmultistate modelstransportability

Identifiers

PMID42444496
PMCPMC13366284

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.