2012
DOI: 10.1016/j.spl.2012.02.025
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Additive hazards models for gap time data with multiple causes

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Later, Martinussen and Scheike (2002) and Lu and Song (2012) used a semiparametric efficient score function to improve estimation efficiency, at the cost of estimating λ0false(tfalse) separately. Some of the recent literature that considered data arising from an AHM include bivariate current status data (Tong et al, 2012), current status data with auxiliary covariates (Feng et al, 2015), informative current status data (Zhao et al, 2015), clustered interval-censored data (Li et al, 2012), gap time data of recurrent events with multiple causes (Sankaran and Anisha, 2012), left-truncated and right-censored data (Huang and Qin, 2013), right-censored data with missing covariates (Hao et al, 2014), right-censored data with missing censoring indicator (Qiu et al, 2015), left-truncated and case I interval-censored data (Wang et al, 2015), right-censored data with instrumental variable (Li et al, 2015) and error-contaminated survival data with replicate measurements (Yan and Yi, 2016), among others.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Later, Martinussen and Scheike (2002) and Lu and Song (2012) used a semiparametric efficient score function to improve estimation efficiency, at the cost of estimating λ0false(tfalse) separately. Some of the recent literature that considered data arising from an AHM include bivariate current status data (Tong et al, 2012), current status data with auxiliary covariates (Feng et al, 2015), informative current status data (Zhao et al, 2015), clustered interval-censored data (Li et al, 2012), gap time data of recurrent events with multiple causes (Sankaran and Anisha, 2012), left-truncated and right-censored data (Huang and Qin, 2013), right-censored data with missing covariates (Hao et al, 2014), right-censored data with missing censoring indicator (Qiu et al, 2015), left-truncated and case I interval-censored data (Wang et al, 2015), right-censored data with instrumental variable (Li et al, 2015) and error-contaminated survival data with replicate measurements (Yan and Yi, 2016), among others.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Many approaches for the analysis of gap times can be highlighted, and among them we can refer to literature. [24][25][26][27][28][29] In survival studies, covariates are usually used to represent heterogeneity in a population. The main goal in such situations is to understand and explore the relationship between survival time and covariates.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Other models, such as hidden Markov models studied by Pievatolo et al (2012) can also be considered as generalizations of renewal processes for gap times. Recently, Sankaran and Anisha (2012) proposed the additive hazard models for gap time with multiple causes, and Zhao and Zhou (2012) developed a marginal rate model for gap times, which is derived from a nonhomogeneous Poisson process. Several other approaches to analyzing recurrent events have been proposed, and many of these approaches can be found in Kalbfleisch and Prentice (2002), Cook and Lawless (2007), and Aalen et al (2008).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%