Adapting SIMEX to correct for bias due to interval‐censored outcomes in survival analysis with time‐varying exposure
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many clinical and epidemiological applications of survival analysis focus on interval-censored events that can be ascertained only at discrete times of clinic visits. This implies that the values of time-varying covariates are not correctly aligned with the true, unknown event times, inducing a bias in the estimated associations. To address this issue, we adapted the simulation-extrapolation (SIMEX) methodology, based on assessing how the estimates change with the artificially increased time between clinic visits. We propose diagnostics to choose the extrapolating function. In simulations, the SIMEX-corrected estimates reduced considerably the bias to the null and generally yielded a better bias/variance trade-off than conventional estimates. In a real-life pharmacoepidemiological application, the proposed method increased by 27% the excess hazard of the estimated association between a time-varying exposure, representing the 2-year cumulative duration of past use of a hypertensive medication, and the hazard of nonmelanoma skin cancer (interval-censored events). These simulation-based and real-life results suggest that the proposed SIMEX-based correction may help improve the accuracy of estimated associations between time-varying exposures and the hazard of interval-censored events in large cohort studies where the events are recorded only at relatively sparse times of clinic visits/assessments. However, these advantages may be less certain for smaller studies and/or weak associations.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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 it