Privacy-preserving analysis of time-to-event data under nested case-control sampling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Analyses of distributed data networks of rare diseases are constrained by legitimate privacy and ethical concerns. Analytical centers (e.g. research institutions) are thus confronted with the challenging task of obtaining data from recruiting sites that are often unable or unwilling to share personal records of participants. For time-to-event data, recently popularized disclosure techniques with privacy guarantees (e.g., Differentially Private Generative Adversarial Networks) are generally computationally expensive or inaccessible to applied researchers. To perform the widely used Cox proportional hazards regression, we propose an easy-to-implement privacy-preserving data analysis technique by pooling (i.e. aggregating) individual records of covariates at recruiting sites under the nested case-control sampling framework before sharing the pooled nested case-control subcohort. We show that the pooled hazard ratio estimators, under the pooled nested case-control subsamples from the contributing sites, are maximum likelihood estimators and provide consistent estimates of the individual level full cohort HRs. Furthermore, a sampling technique for generating pseudo-event times for individual subjects that constitute the pooled nested case-control subsamples is proposed. Our method is demonstrated using extensive simulations and analysis of the National Lung Screening Trial data. The utility of our proposed approach is compared to the gold standard (full cohort) and synthetic data generated using classification and regression trees. The proposed pooling technique performs to near-optimal levels comparable to full cohort analysis or synthetic data; the efficiency improves in rare event settings when more controls are matched on during nested case-control subcohort sampling.
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 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 | 0.053 | 0.731 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.017 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.053 | 0.203 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".