The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Landmark Analysis at the 25-Year Landmark Point
Abstract
This statistical primer presents the landmark analysis method, exploring its appropriate use and interpretation while recognizing its limitations. This observational method is used for comparing time-to-event outcome between groups determined during study follow-up. The goal of the landmark method is to estimate in an unbiased way the time-to-event probabilities in each group conditional on the group membership of patients at a specific time point, the landmark time. The need that led to its development, the impact of the method, and its pros and cons, along with available alternative approaches, are presented. Simulations explore its performance, using realistic parameters from a recent cardiovascular study. As long as the limitations of the method are recognized and the interpretation of its results clearly reflect their “conditional” nature, landmark analysis, 25 years from its introduction, can still be of value.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Regression Models and Life-Tables
Cox, D. R. (1972) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology · doi:10.1111/j.2517-6161.1972.tb00899.x · Cited by 39,793
Cited by
Connolly, S. J., Eikelboom, J. W., Bosch, J., Dagenais, G., Dyal, L., Lanas, F., Metsarinne, K., O'Donnell, M., Dans, A. L., Ha, J.-W., et al. (2018) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(17)32458-3 · Cited by 754
Challenges of Guarantee-Time Bias
Giobbie-Hurder, A., Gelber, R. D., & Regan, M. M. (2013) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2013.49.5283 · Cited by 458
Delta-radiomics features for the prediction of patient outcomes in non–small cell lung cancer
Fave, X., Zhang, L., Yang, J., Mackin, D., Balter, P., Gomez, D., Followill, D., Jones, A. K., Stingo, F., Liao, Z., et al. (2017) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-017-00665-z · Cited by 353
Surgery Does Not Improve Survival in Patients With Isolated Severe Tricuspid Regurgitation
Axtell, A. L., Bhambhani, V., Moonsamy, P., Healy, E. W., Picard, M. H., Sundt, T. M., & Wasfy, J. H. (2019) · Journal of the American College of Cardiology · doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2019.04.028 · Cited by 312
Hippisley-Cox, J., Coupland, C. A., Mehta, N., Keogh, R. H., Diaz-Ordaz, K., Khunti, K., Lyons, R. A., Kee, F., Sheikh, A., Rahman, S., et al. (2021) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.n2244 · Cited by 308
Metadata
- Authors
- Dafni, U.
- Venue
- Circulation: Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes
- Published
- 2011-05
- Volume
- 4
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 363-371
- ISSN
- 1941-7705 (ISSN-L)
- 1941-7713
- OpenAlex
- W2138740885
- Cited by
- 569
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 8.35
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Landmark Analysis at the 25-Year Landmark Point. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/circoutcomes.110.957951
- The paper
- Dafni, U. (2011). Landmark Analysis at the 25-Year Landmark Point. Circulation: Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes. https://doi.org/10.1161/circoutcomes.110.957951
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.