跳到正文
← 返回论文列表与筛选
阅读说明

本页整理公开书目信息,不生成学术质量评分。AI 解读根据题名及所注明的摘要或原文片段生成,未完成全文核验,可能有误;具体假设、证明与结论请核对原文。摘要保留来源文本,未经模型改写。

DOI 首次登记不等于接收或发表日期。部分更正、评论等条目没有独立摘要;缺少可靠材料时保留待补状态。

引用量采用 OpenAlex 单条关联记录,不合计多个记录;关联记录可能包含正式发表版本,不等于此版本单独引用。缺失不视为零,引用指标不代表论文质量。

关注作者按书目中的完整姓名匹配,同名和姓名变体需人工辨别。相关论文先按共享细分方向和具体方法排列,再参考通用方法与发表日期。

分类依据与纠错

AI 根据所提供的论文材料归类:摘要聚焦竞争风险生存模型与累积发生概率,没有所列计量细分的充分直接证据。

反馈分类问题

正在核对关联版本…

代码、数据与补充材料

正在核对对应版本的资源…

关注这篇论文的作者
Jason P. Fine
Robert J. Gray

竞争风险子分布的比例风险模型

研究问题
竞争风险数据中,如何直接围绕特定原因的累积发生概率建模,并分析协变量与该概率函数的关系?
方法与思路
作者提出半参数子分布比例风险模型,结合部分似然与加权技术,在多种删失情形下构造回归参数估计和推断。
材料陈述的贡献
摘要称,文章提供个体累积发生函数的一致估计及区间、置信带方法,并以乳腺癌试验比较两类风险模型。
阅读关注点
应核对子分布风险与原因别风险的区别、删失权重条件,以及回归系数如何转化为累积发生概率的变化。
阅读边界
仅据 OpenAlex 索引摘要,稿件版本未注明;不同删失情形的具体条件未提供,回归关联也不能直接解释为因果效应。

原文摘要

With explanatory covariates, the standard analysis for competing risks data involves modeling the cause-specific hazard functions via a proportional hazards assumption. Unfortunately, the cause-specific hazard function does not have a direct interpretation in terms of survival probabilities for the particular failure type. In recent years many clinicians have begun using the cumulative incidence function, the marginal failure probabilities for a particular cause, which is intuitively appealing and more easily explained to the nonstatistician. The cumulative incidence is especially relevant in cost-effectiveness analyses in which the survival probabilities are needed to determine treatment utility. Previously, authors have considered methods for combining estimates of the cause-specific hazard functions under the proportional hazards formulation. However, these methods do not allow the analyst to directly assess the effect of a covariate on the marginal probability function. In this article we propose a novel semiparametric proportional hazards model for the subdistribution. Using the partial likelihood principle and weighting techniques, we derive estimation and inference procedures for the finite-dimensional regression parameter under a variety of censoring scenarios. We give a uniformly consistent estimator for the predicted cumulative incidence for an individual with certain covariates; confidence intervals and bands can be obtained analytically or with an easy-to-implement simulation technique. To contrast the two approaches, we analyze a dataset from a breast cancer clinical trial under both models.

笔记与分组
相关领域论文