Cited by 413Statistical Methods and InferenceStatistical Methods in EpidemiologyStatistical Distribution Estimation and Applications

Evaluating Prediction Rules for t -Year Survivors With Censored Regression Models

Open access
Uno, Hajime, Cai, Tianxi, Tian, Lu, Wei, L. J·2007·Journal of the American Statistical Association

Abstract

Suppose that we are interested in establishing simple but reliable rules for predicting future t-year survivors through censored regression models. In this article we present inference procedures for evaluating such binary classification rules based on various prediction precision measures quantified by the overall misclassification rate, sensitivity and specificity, and positive and negative predictive values. Specifically, under various working models, we derive consistent estimators for the above measures through substitution and cross-validation estimation procedures. Furthermore, we provide large-sample approximations to the distributions of these nonsmooth estimators without assuming that the working model is correctly specified. Confidence intervals, for example, for the difference of the precision measures between two competing rules can then be constructed. All of the proposals are illustrated with real examples, and their finite-sample properties are evaluated through a simulation study.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1198/016214507000000149

Cites

49 of 49 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Uno and colleagues' inverse probability of censoring weights method can account for censoring.

    “Uno and colleagues' inverse probability of censoring weights method can account for censoring.”

    From Developing clinical prediction models: a step-by-step guide (2024) · cites this paper as [82]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Uno, H., Cai, T., Tian, L., & Wei, L. J.
Affiliations
Northwestern University (US)
Venue
Journal of the American Statistical Association
Published
2007-06
Volume
102
Issue
478
Pages
527-537
ISSN
  • 0162-1459 (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-274X
OpenAlex
W2082174016
Cited by
413
References
48
Citations by year
2026: 32 · 2025: 37 · 2024: 33 · 2023: 35 · 2022: 46 · 2021: 43 · 2020: 50 · 2019: 20 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 18 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 7
FWCI
4.74
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of the American Statistical Association (publishedVersion)
  • Collection of Biostatistics Research Archive (submittedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Inference
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Epidemiology
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Distribution Estimation and Applications
Keywords
prediction rules, binary classification, misclassification rate, sensitivity and specificity, predictive value, consistent estimators, cross-validation, large sample approximation, confidence intervals, finite sample properties

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