English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Background  In longitudinal studies where subjects experience recurrent incidents over a period of time, such as respiratory infections, fever or diarrhea, statistical methods are required to take into account the within-subject correlation.    Methods  For repeated events data with censored failure, the independent increment (AG), marginal (WLW) and conditional (PWP) models are three multiple failure models that generalize Cox’s proportional hazard model. In this paper, we revise the efficiency, accuracy and robustness of all three models under simulated scenarios with varying degrees of within-subject correlation, censoring levels, maximum number of possible recurrences and sample size. We also study the methods performance on a real dataset from a cohort study with bronchial obstruction.    Results  We find substantial differences between methods and there is not an optimal method. AG and PWP seem to be preferable to WLW for low correlation levels but the situation reverts for high correlations.    Conclusions  All methods are stable in front of censoring, worsen with increasing recurrence levels and share a bias problem which, among other consequences, makes asymptotic normal confidence intervals not fully reliable, although they are well developed theoretically.

Empirical study of correlated survival times for recurrent events with proportional hazards margins and the effect of correlation and censoring