在Cox比例风险模型下模拟时间事件数据:评估非参数柔性风险方法的性能

IF 1.3 Q3 MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS Frontiers in Applied Mathematics and Statistics Pub Date : 2023-10-30 DOI:10.3389/fams.2023.1272334
Jennifer L. Delzeit, Devin C. Koestler
{"title":"在Cox比例风险模型下模拟时间事件数据:评估非参数柔性风险方法的性能","authors":"Jennifer L. Delzeit, Devin C. Koestler","doi":"10.3389/fams.2023.1272334","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Numerous methods and approaches have been developed for generating time-to-event data from the Cox Proportional Hazards (CPH) model; however, they often require specification of a parametric distribution for the baseline hazard even though the CPH model itself makes no assumptions on the distribution of the baseline hazards. In line with the semi-parametric nature of the CPH model, a recently proposed method called the Flexible Hazards Method generates time-to-event data from a CPH model using a non-parametric baseline hazard function. While the initial results of this method are promising, it has not yet been comprehensively assessed with increasing covariates or against data generated under parametric baseline hazards. To fill this gap, we conducted a comprehensive study to benchmark the performance of the Flexible Hazards Method for generating data from a CPH model against parametric methods. Our results showed that with a single covariate and large enough assumed maximum time, the bias in the Flexible Hazards Method is 0.02 (with respect to the log hazard ratio) with a 95% confidence interval having coverage of 84.4%. This bias increases to 0.054 when there are 10 covariates under the same settings and the coverage of the 95% confidence interval decreases to 46.7%. In this paper, we explain the plausible reasons for this observed increase in bias and decrease in coverage as the number of covariates are increased, both empirically and theoretically, and provide readers and potential users of this method with some suggestions on how to best address these issues. In summary, the Flexible Hazards Method performs well when there are few covariates and the user wishes to simulate data from a non-parametric baseline hazard.","PeriodicalId":36662,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Applied Mathematics and Statistics","volume":"45 5","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Simulating time-to-event data under the Cox proportional hazards model: assessing the performance of the non-parametric Flexible Hazards Method\",\"authors\":\"Jennifer L. Delzeit, Devin C. Koestler\",\"doi\":\"10.3389/fams.2023.1272334\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Numerous methods and approaches have been developed for generating time-to-event data from the Cox Proportional Hazards (CPH) model; however, they often require specification of a parametric distribution for the baseline hazard even though the CPH model itself makes no assumptions on the distribution of the baseline hazards. In line with the semi-parametric nature of the CPH model, a recently proposed method called the Flexible Hazards Method generates time-to-event data from a CPH model using a non-parametric baseline hazard function. While the initial results of this method are promising, it has not yet been comprehensively assessed with increasing covariates or against data generated under parametric baseline hazards. To fill this gap, we conducted a comprehensive study to benchmark the performance of the Flexible Hazards Method for generating data from a CPH model against parametric methods. Our results showed that with a single covariate and large enough assumed maximum time, the bias in the Flexible Hazards Method is 0.02 (with respect to the log hazard ratio) with a 95% confidence interval having coverage of 84.4%. This bias increases to 0.054 when there are 10 covariates under the same settings and the coverage of the 95% confidence interval decreases to 46.7%. In this paper, we explain the plausible reasons for this observed increase in bias and decrease in coverage as the number of covariates are increased, both empirically and theoretically, and provide readers and potential users of this method with some suggestions on how to best address these issues. In summary, the Flexible Hazards Method performs well when there are few covariates and the user wishes to simulate data from a non-parametric baseline hazard.\",\"PeriodicalId\":36662,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Frontiers in Applied Mathematics and Statistics\",\"volume\":\"45 5\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Frontiers in Applied Mathematics and Statistics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3389/fams.2023.1272334\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Applied Mathematics and Statistics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fams.2023.1272334","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

从Cox比例风险(CPH)模型中生成事件时间数据已经开发了许多方法和方法;然而,即使CPH模型本身没有对基线危害的分布做出假设,它们也经常需要对基线危害的参数分布进行说明。根据CPH模型的半参数性质,最近提出了一种称为柔性危害方法的方法,该方法使用非参数基线危害函数从CPH模型生成事件时间数据。虽然该方法的初步结果是有希望的,但尚未通过增加协变量或根据参数基线危险产生的数据对其进行全面评估。为了填补这一空白,我们进行了一项全面的研究,对柔性危害方法的性能进行基准测试,以从CPH模型中生成数据,并与参数方法进行比较。我们的结果表明,在单个协变量和足够大的假设最大时间下,灵活风险方法的偏差为0.02(相对于对数风险比),95%的置信区间覆盖率为84.4%。当相同设置下有10个协变量时,该偏差增加到0.054,95%置信区间的覆盖率下降到46.7%。在本文中,我们从经验和理论上解释了随着协变量数量的增加而观察到的偏倚增加和覆盖率下降的合理原因,并为读者和该方法的潜在用户提供了一些关于如何最好地解决这些问题的建议。总而言之,当协变量较少且用户希望从非参数基线风险中模拟数据时,柔性风险方法表现良好。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Simulating time-to-event data under the Cox proportional hazards model: assessing the performance of the non-parametric Flexible Hazards Method
Numerous methods and approaches have been developed for generating time-to-event data from the Cox Proportional Hazards (CPH) model; however, they often require specification of a parametric distribution for the baseline hazard even though the CPH model itself makes no assumptions on the distribution of the baseline hazards. In line with the semi-parametric nature of the CPH model, a recently proposed method called the Flexible Hazards Method generates time-to-event data from a CPH model using a non-parametric baseline hazard function. While the initial results of this method are promising, it has not yet been comprehensively assessed with increasing covariates or against data generated under parametric baseline hazards. To fill this gap, we conducted a comprehensive study to benchmark the performance of the Flexible Hazards Method for generating data from a CPH model against parametric methods. Our results showed that with a single covariate and large enough assumed maximum time, the bias in the Flexible Hazards Method is 0.02 (with respect to the log hazard ratio) with a 95% confidence interval having coverage of 84.4%. This bias increases to 0.054 when there are 10 covariates under the same settings and the coverage of the 95% confidence interval decreases to 46.7%. In this paper, we explain the plausible reasons for this observed increase in bias and decrease in coverage as the number of covariates are increased, both empirically and theoretically, and provide readers and potential users of this method with some suggestions on how to best address these issues. In summary, the Flexible Hazards Method performs well when there are few covariates and the user wishes to simulate data from a non-parametric baseline hazard.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Frontiers in Applied Mathematics and Statistics
Frontiers in Applied Mathematics and Statistics Mathematics-Statistics and Probability
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
7.10%
发文量
117
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊最新文献
Third-degree B-spline collocation method for singularly perturbed time delay parabolic problem with two parameters Item response theory to discriminate COVID-19 knowledge and attitudes among university students Editorial: Justified modeling frameworks and novel interpretations of ecological and epidemiological systems Pneumonia and COVID-19 co-infection modeling with optimal control analysis Enhanced corn seed disease classification: leveraging MobileNetV2 with feature augmentation and transfer learning
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1