ScholarGate
Assistant

Comparer des méthodes

Examinez les méthodes sélectionnées côte à côte ; les lignes qui diffèrent sont mises en évidence.

Analyse des risques concurrents appariés×Pondération par l'inverse de la probabilité de traitement (IPW / IPTW)×
DomaineÉpidémiologieInférence causale
FamilleProcess / pipelineRegression model
Année d'origine1999 (Fine-Gray model); extended to matched designs ~2010s2000
Auteur d'origineFine & Gray (subdistribution hazard model); Austin, Lee & Fine (matched competing risks framework)Robins, Hernán & Brumback
TypeObservational survival analysis with matching and competing eventsCausal inference weighting estimator
Source fondatriceFine, 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 ↗Robins, J. M., Hernán, M. A., & Brumback, B. (2000). Marginal Structural Models and Causal Inference in Epidemiology. Epidemiology, 11(5), 550-560. DOI ↗
Aliasmatched Fine-Gray analysis, propensity-matched competing risks, matched cause-specific hazard analysis, matched subdistribution hazard analysisIPW, IPTW, inverse probability of treatment weighting, marginal structural model weighting
Apparentées45
RésuméMatched competing risks analysis combines subject-level matching (e.g., propensity-score matching) with competing risks survival methods to estimate the cause-specific or subdistribution hazard of an event of interest while accounting for competing events that preclude the occurrence of that event. It is widely used in clinical and epidemiological observational studies where patients may die from causes other than the primary outcome of interest, and where treatment groups differ on baseline confounders.Inverse Probability Weighting is a causal-inference method that assigns each observation a weight equal to the inverse of its probability of receiving the treatment it actually received. Introduced by Robins, Hernán and Brumback (2000) for marginal structural models, it builds a pseudo-population in which treatment is independent of measured confounders, balancing selection bias.
ScholarGateJeu de données
  1. v1
  2. 2 Sources
  3. PUBLISHED
  1. v1
  2. 2 Sources
  3. PUBLISHED

Aller à la recherche Télécharger les diapositives

ScholarGateComparer des méthodes: Matched Competing Risks Analysis · Inverse Probability Weighting. Consulté le 2026-06-18 sur https://scholargate.app/fr/compare