Adapting SIMEX to correct for bias due to interval‐censored outcomes in survival analysis with time‐varying exposure
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.
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 | 0.052 | 0.120 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".