The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Estimation and comparison of Changes in the Presence of Informative Right Censoring: Conditional Linear Model
Abstract
A general linear regression model for the usual least squares estimated rate of change (slope) on censoring time is described as an approximation to account for informative right censoring in estimating and comparing changes of a continuous variable in two groups. Two noniterative estimators for the group slope means, the linear minimum variance unbiased (LMVUB) estimator and the linear minimum mean squared error (LMMSE) estimator, are proposed under this conditional model. In realistic situations, we illustrate that the LMVUB and LMMSE estimators, derived under a simple linear regression model, are quite competitive compared to the pseudo maximum likelihood estimator (PMLE) derived by modeling the censoring probabilities. Generalizations to polynomial response curves and general linear models are also described.
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
(2005) · Statistics for Biology and Health · doi:10.1007/0-387-27255-0_9 · Cited by 20,133
Random-Effects Models for Longitudinal Data
Laird, N. M., & Ware, J. H. (1982) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2529876 · Cited by 8,923
Wu, M. C., & Carroll, R. J. (1987) · doi:10.21236/ada186320 · Cited by 523
Self-citationEfficient Inference for Random-Coefficient Growth Curve Models with Unbalanced Data
Vonesh, E. F., & Carter, R. L. (1987) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2531999 · Cited by 149
Cited by
Modeling the Drop-Out Mechanism in Repeated-Measures Studies
Little, R. J. A. (1995) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1080/01621459.1995.10476615 · Cited by 1,522
The modification of diet in renal disease study group
Beck, G. J., Berg, R. L., Coggins, C. H., Gassman, J. J., Hunsicker, L. G., Schluchter, M. D., & Williams, G. W. (1991) · Controlled Clinical Trials · doi:10.1016/0197-2456(91)90069-x · Cited by 818
Statistical Considerations in the Intent-to-Treat Principle
Lachin, J. M. (2000) · Controlled Clinical Trials · doi:10.1016/s0197-2456(00)00046-5 · Cited by 652
Frison, L., & Pocock, S. J. (1992) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.4780111304 · Cited by 593
Missing data methods in longitudinal studies: a review
Ibrahim, J. G., & Molenberghs, G. (2009) · TEST · doi:10.1007/s11749-009-0138-x · Cited by 512
Metadata
- Authors
- Wu, M. C., & Bailey, K. R.
- Venue
- Biometrics
- Publisher
- JSTOR
- Published
- 1989-09
- Volume
- 45
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 939
- ISSN
- 0006-341X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2029615513
- Cited by
- 370
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 5.97
- 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: Estimation and comparison of Changes in the Presence of Informative Right Censoring: Conditional Linear Model. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/2531694
- The paper
- Wu, M. C., & Bailey, K. R. (1989). Estimation and comparison of Changes in the Presence of Informative Right Censoring: Conditional Linear Model. Biometrics. https://doi.org/10.2307/2531694
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.
