
doi: 10.1002/sim.850
pmid: 11468764
AbstractAdministrative censoring, in which potential censoring times are known even for subjects who fail, is common in clinical and epidemiologic studies. Nonetheless, most statistical methods for failure‐time data do not use the information contained in these potential censoring times. Robins has proposed two approaches for using this information to estimate parameters in an accelerated failure‐time model; the methods generally require the analyst to treat as censored some subjects whose failure time is observed. This paper provides a rationale for this ‘artificial censoring’, discusses some of its consequences, and illustrates some of these points with data from a randomized trial of breast cancer screening. Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Adult, Breast Neoplasms, Middle Aged, Models, Biological, Survival Analysis, Treatment Refusal, Humans, Mass Screening, Regression Analysis, Female, Mammography, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
Adult, Breast Neoplasms, Middle Aged, Models, Biological, Survival Analysis, Treatment Refusal, Humans, Mass Screening, Regression Analysis, Female, Mammography, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 47 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
