z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
Interval-censored time-to-event and competing risk with death: is the illness-death model more accurate than the Cox model?
Author(s) -
Karen Leffondré,
Célia Touraine,
Catherine Helmer,
Pierre Joly
Publication year - 2013
Publication title -
international journal of epidemiology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 3.406
H-Index - 208
eISSN - 1464-3685
pISSN - 0300-5771
DOI - 10.1093/ije/dyt126
Subject(s) - proportional hazards model , event (particle physics) , survival analysis , medicine , risk model , interval (graph theory) , confidence interval , statistics , demography , econometrics , mathematics , risk analysis (engineering) , physics , sociology , quantum mechanics , combinatorics
In survival analyses of longitudinal data, death is often a competing event for the disease of interest, and the time-to-disease onset is interval-censored when the diagnosis is made at intermittent follow-up visits. As a result, the disease status at death is unknown for subjects disease-free at the last visit before death. Standard survival analysis consists in right-censoring the time-to-disease onset at that visit, which may induce an underestimation of the disease incidence. By contrast, an illness-death model for interval-censored data accounts for the probability of developing the disease between that visit and death, and provides a better incidence estimate. However, the two approaches have never been compared for estimating the effect of exposure on disease risk.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here
Accelerating Research

Address

John Eccles House
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom