On adjustment for auxiliary covariates in additive hazard models for the analysis of randomized experiments
随机实验中加性风险模型的辅助协变量调整AI 解读 ↓
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。
AI 根据所提供的论文材料归类:摘要直接研究随机实验中的处理效应估计及协变量调整,属于因果推断。
随机实验中加性风险模型的辅助协变量调整AI 解读 ↓
正在核对关联版本…
正在核对对应版本的资源…
We consider additive hazard models (Aalen, 1989) for the effect of a randomized treatment on a survival outcome, adjusting for auxiliary baseline covariates. We demonstrate that the Aalen least squares estimator of the treatment effect parameter is asymptotically unbiased, even when the hazard's dependence on time or on the auxiliary covariates is misspecified, and even away from the null hypothesis of no treatment effect. We moreover show that adjustment for auxiliary baseline covariates does not change the asymptotic variance of the Aalen least squares estimator of the effect of a randomized treatment. We conclude that, in view of its robustness against model misspecification, Aalen least squares estimation is attractive for evaluating treatment effects on a survival outcome in randomized experiments, and that the primary reasons to consider baseline covariate adjustment in such settings may be the interest in subgroup effects, or the need to adjust for informative censoring or for baseline imbalances. Our results also shed light on the robustness of Aalen least squares estimators against model misspecification in observational studies.