How Cox models react to a study-specific confounder in a patient-level pooled dataset: random effects better cope with an imbalanced covariate across trials unless baseline hazards differ

DOI10.1080/02664763.2019.1573216MaRDI QIDQ5036646zbMATH OpenOpenAlexFDO

Authors Thomas McAndrew, Bjorn Redfors, Aaron Crowley, Yiran Zhang, Shmuel Chen, Mordechai Golomb, Maria C. Alu, Dominic P. Francese, Ori Ben-Yehuda, Akiko Maehara, Gary S. Mintz, Gregg W. Stone, Paul L. Jenkins

Publication date 23 February 2022

Published in Journal of Applied Statistics (Search for Journal in Brave)

Full work available at URL https://arxiv.org/abs/1805.02821

zbMATH Keywords

Cox proportional hazardsfixed effectsfrailtypooling datarandom effects

Mathematics Subject Classification ID

Applications of statistics (62Pxx)

Recommendations

• Meta-analysis methodology for combining treatment effects from Cox proportional hazard models with different covariate adjustments
• Identification of homogeneous and heterogeneous variables in pooled cohort studies
• Validity of regression meta-analyses versus pooled analyses of mixed effect linear models
• Does Cox analysis of a randomized survival study yield a causal treatment effect?
• Model Misspecification in Proportional Hazards Regression

Cited in

(1)

• Identification of homogeneous and heterogeneous variables in pooled cohort studies

This page was built for publication: How Cox models react to a study-specific confounder in a patient-level pooled dataset: random effects better cope with an imbalanced covariate across trials unless baseline hazards differ

Report a bug (only for logged in users!)Click here to report a bug for this page (MaRDI item Q5036646)