ScholarGate
Assistent

Compara mètodes

Revisa els mètodes seleccionats l'un al costat de l'altre; les files que difereixen es ressalten.

Anàlisi de Riscos Competitius Ajustada pel Risc×Emparellament per puntuació de propensió×
CampEpidemiologiaEstadística per a la recerca
FamíliaProcess / pipelineProcess / pipeline
Any d'origen1999 (subdistribution hazard model); cause-specific hazard framework earlier1983
Autor originalJason Fine and Robert GrayPaul Rosenbaum and Donald Rubin
TipusRegression model for time-to-event data with competing eventsMethod
Font seminalFine, J. P., & Gray, R. J. (1999). A proportional hazards model for the subdistribution of a competing risk. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 94(446), 496–509. DOI ↗Rosenbaum, P. R., & Rubin, D. B. (1983). The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika, 70(1), 41–55. DOI ↗
Àliescompeting risks regression, subdistribution hazard model, cause-specific hazard analysis, Fine-Gray modelPSM, propensity score weighting, covariate balance
Relacionats43
ResumRisk-adjusted competing risks analysis extends classical survival analysis to settings where subjects can experience more than one type of terminal event, and where the occurrence of one event prevents the occurrence of another. By modelling cause-specific or subdistribution hazards while adjusting for measured confounders, the method yields unbiased estimates of the absolute probability — the cumulative incidence function — of each event type over time in the presence of competing events.Propensity score matching (PSM) is a method for reducing confounding bias in observational studies by balancing baseline characteristics between treatment groups, simulating randomization. Developed by Rosenbaum and Rubin (1983), it estimates the probability of receiving treatment given observed covariates, then matches or weights treated and control individuals with similar treatment probabilities. Widely used in medicine, epidemiology, and policy evaluation when randomized trials are infeasible or unethical, enabling estimation of treatment effects while controlling for selection bias.
ScholarGateConjunt de dades
  1. v1
  2. 2 Fonts
  3. PUBLISHED
  1. v1
  2. 3 Fonts
  3. PUBLISHED

Ves a la cerca Baixa les diapositives

ScholarGateCompara mètodes: Risk-adjusted competing risks analysis · Propensity Score Matching. Recuperat el 2026-06-17 de https://scholargate.app/ca/compare