OBJECTIVES: To display and discuss the reasons and consequences of length and time-dependent bias. They might occur in presence of a time-dependent study entry or a time-dependent exposure which might change from unexposed to exposed. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Recalling the popular study of Oscar nominees and using a real-data example from hospital epidemiology, we give innovative and easy-to-understand graphical presentations of how these biases corrupt the analyses via distorted time-at-risk. Cumulative hazard plots and Cox proportional hazards models were used. We are building bridges to medical disciplines such as critical care medicine, hepatology, pharmaco-epidemiology, transplantation medicine, neurology, gynecology and cardiology. RESULTS: In presence of time-dependent bias, the hazard ratio (comparing exposed with unexposed) is artificially underestimated. The length bias leads to an artificial underestimation of the overall hazard. When both biases coexist it can lead to different directions of biased hazard ratios. CONCLUSION: Since length and time-dependent bias might occur in several medical disciplines, we conclude that understanding and awareness are the best prevention of survival bias.
OBJECTIVES: To display and discuss the reasons and consequences of length and time-dependent bias. They might occur in presence of a time-dependent study entry or a time-dependent exposure which might change from unexposed to exposed. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING:Recalling the popular study of Oscar nominees and using a real-data example from hospital epidemiology, we give innovative and easy-to-understand graphical presentations of how these biases corrupt the analyses via distorted time-at-risk. Cumulative hazard plots and Cox proportional hazards models were used. We are building bridges to medical disciplines such as critical care medicine, hepatology, pharmaco-epidemiology, transplantation medicine, neurology, gynecology and cardiology. RESULTS: In presence of time-dependent bias, the hazard ratio (comparing exposed with unexposed) is artificially underestimated. The length bias leads to an artificial underestimation of the overall hazard. When both biases coexist it can lead to different directions of biased hazard ratios. CONCLUSION: Since length and time-dependent bias might occur in several medical disciplines, we conclude that understanding and awareness are the best prevention of survival bias.
Authors: Jessica Chubak; Denise M Boudreau; Heidi S Wirtz; Barbara McKnight; Noel S Weiss Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2013-08-12 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Pavel S Roshanov; John W Eikelboom; Mark Crowther; Vikas Tandon; Flavia K Borges; Clive Kearon; Andre Lamy; Richard Whitlock; Bruce M Biccard; Wojciech Szczeklik; Gordon H Guyatt; Mohamed Panju; Jessica Spence; Amit X Garg; Michael McGillion; Tomas VanHelder; Peter A Kavsak; Justin de Beer; Mitchell Winemaker; Daniel I Sessler; Yannick Le Manach; Tej Sheth; Jehonathan H Pinthus; Lehana Thabane; Marko R I Simunovic; Ryszard Mizera; Sebastian Ribas; P J Devereaux Journal: CMAJ Open Date: 2017-08-04
Authors: Matthew A Sparks; Andrew M South; Andrew D Badley; Carissa M Baker-Smith; Daniel Batlle; Biykem Bozkurt; Roberto Cattaneo; Steven D Crowley; Louis J Dell'Italia; Andria L Ford; Kathy Griendling; Susan B Gurley; Scott E Kasner; Joseph A Murray; Karl A Nath; Marc A Pfeffer; Janani Rangaswami; W Robert Taylor; Vesna D Garovic Journal: Hypertension Date: 2020-09-28 Impact factor: 10.190
Authors: Matthew D Galsky; Kristian Stensland; John P Sfakianos; Reza Mehrazin; Michael Diefenbach; Nihal Mohamed; Che-Kai Tsao; Paolo Boffetta; Peter Wiklund; William K Oh; Madhu Mazumdar; Bart Ferket Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2016-06-06 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Jarett D Berry; Anurag Mehta; Kai Lin; Colby R Ayers; Timothy Carroll; Ambarish Pandey; Daniel B Garside; Martha L Daviglus; Chun Yuan; Donald M Lloyd-Jones Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2019-09-16 Impact factor: 7.792