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:摘要直接研究随机治疗的无效应检验,并分析模型误设与删失如何影响治疗效应推断。

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
A. G. DiRienzo
S. W. Lagakos

模型误设对 Cox 比例风险模型中无随机治疗效应检验的影响

研究问题
随机治疗研究中,Cox 模型误设和删失对治疗组及协变量的依赖,如何影响模型型与稳健检验的有效性?
方法与思路
作者结合渐近分析与小样本模拟,比较基于部分似然的治疗得分和 Wald 检验,并考察不同删失依赖结构。
材料陈述的贡献
摘要称特定删失条件下检验分子渐近均值为零;若模型误设且删失同时依赖治疗与协变量,两类检验都可能无效。
阅读关注点
应核对摘要给出的两种条件独立限制、模型型方差不一致时检验大小的表现,以及对数秩检验有效性的适用条件。
阅读边界
仅据所给 Crossref 摘要,不能认为随机化或稳健方差足以保证检验有效;具体正则条件与模拟失真幅度未提供。

原文摘要

Summary We examine the asymptotic and small sample properties of model-based and robust tests of the null hypothesis of no randomized treatment effect based on the partial likelihood arising from an arbitrarily misspecified Cox proportional hazards model. When the distribution of the censoring variable is either conditionally independent of the treatment group given covariates or conditionally independent of covariates given the treatment group, the numerators of the partial likelihood treatment score and Wald tests have asymptotic mean equal to 0 under the null hypothesis, regardless of whether or how the Cox model is misspecified. We show that the model-based variance estimators used in the calculation of the model-based tests are not, in general, consistent under model misspecification, yet using analytic considerations and simulations we show that their true sizes can be as close to the nominal value as tests calculated with robust variance estimators. As a special case, we show that the model-based log-rank test is asymptotically valid. When the Cox model is misspecified and the distribution of censoring depends on both treatment group and covariates, the asymptotic distributions of the resulting partial likelihood treatment score statistic and maximum partial likelihood estimator do not, in general, have a zero mean under the null hypothesis. Here neither the fully model-based tests, including the log-rank test, nor the robust tests will be asymptotically valid, and we show through simulations that the distortion to test size can be substantial.

笔记与分组
相关领域论文