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 Tools annual

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 monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

The hazard ratio is one of the most commonly reported measures of treatmenteffect in randomised trials, yet the source of much misinterpretation. Thispoint was made clear by (Hernan, 2010) in commentary, which emphasised that thehazard ratio contrasts populations of treated and untreated individuals whosurvived a given period of time, populations that will typically fail to becomparable - even in a randomised trial - as a result of different pressures orintensities acting on both populations. The commentary has been veryinfluential, but also a source of surprise and confusion. In this note, we aimto provide more insight into the subtle interpretation of hazard ratios anddifferences, by investigating in particular what can be learned about treatmenteffect from the hazard ratio becoming 1 after a certain period of time.Throughout, we will focus on the analysis of randomised experiments, but ourresults have immediate implications for the interpretation of hazard ratios inobservational studies.

Subtleties in the interpretation of hazard ratios