Competing risk of mortality in association studies of non-fatal events.
In geriatric research of non-fatal events, participants often die during the study follow-up without having the non-fatal event of interest. Cause-specific (CS) hazard regression and Fine-Gray (FG) subdistribution hazard regression are the two most common estimation approaches addressing such compet...
Guardado en:
| Autor principal: | |
|---|---|
| Formato: | article |
| Lenguaje: | EN |
| Publicado: |
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
2021
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://doaj.org/article/1b152f70769a47f3ba61f09fb077c116 |
| Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
| Sumario: | In geriatric research of non-fatal events, participants often die during the study follow-up without having the non-fatal event of interest. Cause-specific (CS) hazard regression and Fine-Gray (FG) subdistribution hazard regression are the two most common estimation approaches addressing such competing risk. We explain how the conventional CS approach and the FG approach differ and why many FG estimates of associations are counter-intuitive. Additionally, we clarify the indirect link between models for hazard and models for cumulative incidence. The methodologies are contrasted on data from the Cardiovascular Health Study, a population-based study in adults aged 65 years and older. |
|---|