Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 244

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

A Review and Critique of Some Models Used in Competing Risk Analysis

Gail, Mitchell·1975·Biometrics

Abstract

We have introduced a notation which allows one to define competing risk models easily and to examine underlying assumptions. We have treated the actuarial model for competing risk in detail, comparing it with other models and giving useful variance formulae both for the case when times of death are available and for the case when they are not. The generality of these methods is illustrated by an example treating two dependent competing risks.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2307/2529721

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cited by

See all 244

Metadata

Authors
Gail, M.
Venue
Biometrics
Publisher
JSTOR
Published
1975-03
Volume
31
Issue
1
Pages
209
ISSN
0006-341X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2319997019
Cited by
244
References
0
FWCI
8.84
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: A Review and Critique of Some Models Used in Competing Risk Analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/2529721
The paper
Gail, M. (1975). A Review and Critique of Some Models Used in Competing Risk Analysis. Biometrics. https://doi.org/10.2307/2529721

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.