ScholarGate
Assistente

Comparar métodos

Examine os métodos selecionados lado a lado; as linhas que diferem ficam destacadas.

Análise de Riscos Competitivos Ajustada por Risco×Propensity Score Matching×
ÁreaEpidemiologiaEstatística para pesquisa
FamíliaProcess / pipelineProcess / pipeline
Ano de origem1999 (subdistribution hazard model); cause-specific hazard framework earlier1983
Autor originalJason Fine and Robert GrayPaul Rosenbaum and Donald Rubin
TipoRegression model for time-to-event data with competing eventsMethod
Fonte 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 ↗
Outros nomescompeting risks regression, subdistribution hazard model, cause-specific hazard analysis, Fine-Gray modelPSM, propensity score weighting, covariate balance
Relacionados43
ResumoRisk-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.
ScholarGateConjunto de dados
  1. v1
  2. 2 Fontes
  3. PUBLISHED
  1. v1
  2. 3 Fontes
  3. PUBLISHED

Ir para a pesquisa Baixar slides

ScholarGateComparar métodos: Risk-adjusted competing risks analysis · Propensity Score Matching. Recuperado em 2026-06-18 de https://scholargate.app/pt/compare