Language:

Ignoring competing events in the analysis of survival data may lead to biased results: a nonmathematical illustration of competing risk analysis

Journal of clinical epidemiology, 2020-06, Vol.122, p.42-48 [Peer Reviewed Journal]

2020 The Authors ;Copyright © 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. ;2020. The Authors ;ISSN: 0895-4356 ;EISSN: 1878-5921 ;DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.03.004 ;PMID: 32165133

Full text available

Actions
1. Add to My Research
2. Remove from My Research
3. E-mail
4. Print
5. Permalink
6. Citation
7. EasyBib
8. EndNote
9. RefWorks
10. Delicious
11. Export RIS
12. Export BibTeX

Title:
Ignoring competing events in the analysis of survival data may lead to biased results: a nonmathematical illustration of competing risk analysis
Author: Schuster, Noah A. ; Hoogendijk, Emiel O. ; Kok, Almar A.L. ; Twisk, Jos W.R. ; Heymans, Martijn W.
Subjects: Aging ; Bias ; Censoring ; Competing risk analysis ; Cumulative incidence ; Data analysis ; Depression - epidemiology ; Depression - mortality ; Epidemiological methods ; Epidemiology ; Etiology ; Female ; Hazard ; Humans ; Incidence ; Kaplan-Meier Estimate ; Male ; Mathematical models ; Medical prognosis ; Mental depression ; Methods ; Observational Studies as Topic ; Proportional Hazards Models ; Regression analysis ; Research Design ; Risk analysis ; Risk Assessment ; Risk Factors ; Sex Characteristics ; Studies ; Survival ; Survival Analysis
Is Part Of: Journal of clinical epidemiology, 2020-06, Vol.122, p.42-48
Description: Competing events are often ignored in epidemiological studies. Conventional methods for the analysis of survival data assume independent or noninformative censoring, which is violated when subjects that experience a competing event are censored. Because many survival studies do not apply competing risk analysis, we explain and illustrate in a nonmathematical way how to analyze and interpret survival data in the presence of competing events. Using data from the Longitudinal Aging Study Amsterdam, both marginal analyses (Kaplan–Meier method and Cox proportional-hazards regression) and competing risk analyses (cumulative incidence function [CIF], cause-specific and subdistribution hazard regression) were performed. We analyzed the association between sex and depressive symptoms, in which death before the onset of depression was a competing event. The Kaplan–Meier method overestimated the cumulative incidence of depressive symptoms. Instead, the CIF should be used. As the subdistribution hazard model has a one-to-one relation with the CIF, it is recommended for prediction research, whereas the cause-specific hazard model is recommended for etiologic research. When competing risks are present, the type of research question guides the choice of the analytical model to be used. In any case, results should be presented for all event types.
Publisher: United States: Elsevier Inc
Language: English
Identifier: ISSN: 0895-4356
EISSN: 1878-5921
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.03.004
PMID: 32165133
Source: AUTh Library subscriptions: ProQuest Central
MEDLINE

Back to results list

Previous Result 7 Next Go to Next page


INSPIRE LIBRARY - TON DUC THANG UNIVERSITY	(84-028) 37 755 057	Feedback
19 Nguyen Huu Tho St. Dist.7, HCM	thuvien@tdtu.edu.vn	Feedback

Ignoring competing events in the analysis of survival data may lead to biased results: a nonmathematical illustration of competing risk analysis

2020 The Authors ;Copyright © 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. ;2020. The Authors ;ISSN: 0895-4356 ;EISSN: 1878-5921 ;DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.03.004 ;PMID: 32165133

Searching Remote Databases, Please Wait