2016
DOI: 10.1111/biom.12547
|View full text |Cite|
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Nonparametric Analysis of Competing Risks Data with Event Category Missing at Random

Abstract: In competing risks setup, the data for each subject consist of the event time, censoring indicator, and event category. However, sometimes the information about the event category can be missing, as, for example, in a case when the date of death is known but the cause of death is not available. In such situations, treating subjects with missing event category as censored leads to the underestimation of the hazard functions. We suggest nonparametric estimators for the cumulative cause-specific hazards and the c… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 17 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In our analysis, we adopt the MAR assumption (4) with Z i including covariates, Sex , MI , NewScreen , and FamilyHis , which means, these observed covariates can fully account for the missingness of the PA infection type. This is a reasonable assumption for the CFFPR dataset because, according to the investigation of Gouskova et al (2017), the two major causes of missing PA infection types are (a) lack of technology to classify the type of PA infection as mucoid or nonmucoid; (b) data recording negligence. Since the MAR assumption is not statistically verifiable (Little and Rubin, 2002), we perform a sensitivity analysis by considering different specifications of Z i .…”
Section: A Real Data Examplementioning
confidence: 99%
“…In our analysis, we adopt the MAR assumption (4) with Z i including covariates, Sex , MI , NewScreen , and FamilyHis , which means, these observed covariates can fully account for the missingness of the PA infection type. This is a reasonable assumption for the CFFPR dataset because, according to the investigation of Gouskova et al (2017), the two major causes of missing PA infection types are (a) lack of technology to classify the type of PA infection as mucoid or nonmucoid; (b) data recording negligence. Since the MAR assumption is not statistically verifiable (Little and Rubin, 2002), we perform a sensitivity analysis by considering different specifications of Z i .…”
Section: A Real Data Examplementioning
confidence: 99%
“…As discussed in the introduction, a parametric estimator for p ij ( t ) proposed by Schaubel and Cai 18 may be subject to model misspecification. One may consider using a nonparametric estimator for p ij ( t ), such as the local likelihood estimator in Lin et al 20 or Nadaraya‐Watson estimator in Gouskova et al 28 …”
Section: Conclusion and Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As discussed in the introduction, a parametric estimator for p ij (t) proposed by Schaubel and Cai 18 may be subject to model misspecification. One may consider using a nonparametric estimator for p ij (t), such as the local likelihood estimator in Lin et al 20 or Nadaraya-Watson estimator in Gouskova et al 28 A general inverse probability weighted estimator based on model ( 9) assumes constant regression coefficients, independent of time t. However, while X i (t) in the model ( 9) is naturally time-varying, the regression coefficient 0 may also be assumed time-varying and is interpreted as a time-dependent association between X i (t) and the likelihood of missingness. To estimate the time-varying coefficient 0 (t) = ( 00 (t), 01 (t), … , 0J (t)) ′ , one can use a spline function to approximate 0j (t), for example, a cubic B-spline function that is written as…”
Section: Conclusion and Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There are two possible approaches for estimating competing risks data with missing cause of failure when the cause is missing at random ( Rubin, 1976 ): (1) complete-case analysis, utilizing only complete observations, e.g., Effraimidis and Dahl (2014) , or, (2) construct a regression model for the missing cause using all observations, including those with missing cause of failure. In the second approach, one can use a global parametric model ( Lu and Tsiatis, 2001 ), a semi-parametric framework ( Goetghebeur and Ryan, 1995 ) or a nonparametric regression method ( Gouskova et al, 2017 ) to estimate the cause-specific hazard functions. A similar problem is also considered in Sun and Gilbert (2012) and Juraska and Gilbert (2016) when considering the competing cause as a mark for the mark-specific hazard function.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%