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:摘要明确以配对治疗方案的处理效应估计为目标,但因果识别条件仍需全文核对。

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
J. Jack Lee
Ker-Chau Li
Robert M. Elashoff

删失配对数据的再删失方法

研究问题
匹配配对数据存在删失时,如何消除配对间异质性带来的干扰参数,避免常规配对差分和似然方法的问题?
方法与思路
作者在各观测删失时间已知时缩短配对内某一删失时间,使两者具有共同时间差,再开展标准配对分析与 M 估计。
材料陈述的贡献
摘要称,再删失可消除相关干扰参数,并建立 M 估计的根号样本量一致性和渐近方差,辅以模拟及实际数据应用。
阅读关注点
应核对再删失后为何可以开展配对分析、删失时间已知的可行性,以及信息损失、模型假设和处理效应的解释。
阅读边界
仅据版本未注明的 OpenAlex 索引摘要;不能推断刊本变化。摘要未给出完整模型或因果识别条件,不能仅凭配对设计确认因果解释。

原文摘要

In comparing two treatment regimens, a matched-pair design is often used for nonhomogeneous experimental units. A standard method of analyzing the resulting data is to consider the difference within pairs, so that the nuisance parameters due to the heterogeneity between pairs can be eliminated and the parameter of interest—the treatment effect—can be estimated. This procedure becomes invalid when the data are subject to censoring, however. In addition, the available likelihood based methods for handling censored data may suffer from the inconsistency problem incurred by the increasing number of nuisance parameters. In this article, we propose a new approach for eliminating the nuisance parameters based on a crucial notion of “recensoring.” Assuming that the censoring time for each observation is known, recensoring is a natural way to force a common lag between the two censoring times within each pair by resetting one of them to a smaller value. After recensoring, we may treat the new observed times as the survival times without censoring. Standard paired data analysis can be applied. M estimation is studied in detail. Root n consistency is established, and the asymptotic variance is obtained. Residual plots can be constructed in the usual way to check model assumptions. Application to a real data set is reported. Comparisons with the work of Holt and Prentice and Wei and Pee are made both in theory and in a simulation study.

笔记与分组