Analyzing cohort studies with interval‐censored data: A new model‐based linear rank‐type test
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract To compare two or more survival distributions with interval‐censored data, various nonparametric tests have been proposed. Some are based on the ‐family introduced by Harrington and Fleming (1991) that allows flexibility for situations in which the hazard ratio decreases monotonically to unity. However, it is unclear how to choose the appropriate value of the parameter . In this work, we propose a novel linear rank‐type test for analyzing interval‐censored data that derived from a proportional reversed hazard model. We show its relationship with decreasing hazard ratio. This test statistic provides an alternative to the ‐based test statistics by bypassing the choice of the parameter. Simulation results show its good behavior. Two studies on breast cancer and drug users illustrate its practical uses and highlight findings that would have been overlooked if other tests had been used. The test is easy to implement with standard software and can be used for a wide range of situations with interval‐censored data to test the equality of survival distributions between two or more independent groups.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.022 | 0.084 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".