Literature DB >> 2242416

Estimates of absolute cause-specific risk in cohort studies.

J Benichou1, M H Gail.   

Abstract

In this paper we study methods for estimating the absolute risk of an event c1 in a time interval [t1, t2], given that the individual is at risk at t1 and given the presence of competing risks. We discuss some advantages of absolute risk for measuring the prognosis of an individual patient and some difficulties of interpretation for comparing two treatment groups. We also discuss the importance of the concept of absolute risk in evaluating public health measures to prevent disease. Variance calculations permit one to gauge the relative importance of random and systematic errors in estimating absolute risk. Efficiency calculations were also performed to determine how much precision is lost in estimating absolute risk with a nonparametric approach or with a flexible piecewise exponential model rather than a simple exponential model, and other calculations indicate the extent of bias that arises with the simple exponential model when that model is invalid. Such calculations suggest that the more flexible models will be useful in practice. Simulations confirm that asymptotic methods yield reliable variance estimates and confidence interval coverages in samples of practical size.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1990        PMID: 2242416

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biometrics        ISSN: 0006-341X            Impact factor:   2.571


  55 in total

1.  Non-parametric estimation of bivariate failure time associations in the presence of a competing risk.

Authors:  Karen Bandeen-Roche; Jing Ning
Journal:  Biometrika       Date:  2008-03-01       Impact factor: 2.445

2.  The use and interpretation of competing risks regression models.

Authors:  James J Dignam; Qiang Zhang; Masha Kocherginsky
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2012-01-26       Impact factor: 12.531

3.  Change in disability after hospitalization or restricted activity in older persons.

Authors:  Thomas M Gill; Heather G Allore; Evelyne A Gahbauer; Terrence E Murphy
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2010-11-03       Impact factor: 56.272

Review 4.  Statistical methods for dependent competing risks.

Authors:  M L Moeschberger; J P Klein
Journal:  Lifetime Data Anal       Date:  1995       Impact factor: 1.588

5.  Risk.

Authors:  Stephen R Cole; Michael G Hudgens; M Alan Brookhart; Daniel Westreich
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2015-02-05       Impact factor: 4.897

6.  Model for individualized prediction of breast cancer risk after a benign breast biopsy.

Authors:  V Shane Pankratz; Amy C Degnim; Ryan D Frank; Marlene H Frost; Daniel W Visscher; Robert A Vierkant; Tina J Hieken; Karthik Ghosh; Yaman Tarabishy; Celine M Vachon; Derek C Radisky; Lynn C Hartmann
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2015-01-26       Impact factor: 44.544

7.  Assessment of the accuracy of the Gail model in women with atypical hyperplasia.

Authors:  V Shane Pankratz; Lynn C Hartmann; Amy C Degnim; Robert A Vierkant; Karthik Ghosh; Celine M Vachon; Marlene H Frost; Shaun D Maloney; Carol Reynolds; Judy C Boughey
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2008-10-14       Impact factor: 44.544

8.  Estimation of the standardized risk difference and ratio in a competing risks framework: application to injection drug use and progression to AIDS after initiation of antiretroviral therapy.

Authors:  Stephen R Cole; Bryan Lau; Joseph J Eron; M Alan Brookhart; Mari M Kitahata; Jeffrey N Martin; William C Mathews; Michael J Mugavero
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2014-06-24       Impact factor: 4.897

9.  The framing effect of relative and absolute risk.

Authors:  D J Malenka; J A Baron; S Johansen; J W Wahrenberger; J M Ross
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  1993-10       Impact factor: 5.128

10.  Two-stage sampling designs for external validation of personal risk models.

Authors:  Alice S Whittemore; Jerry Halpern
Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res       Date:  2013-04-16       Impact factor: 3.021

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.