Volume 27, Issue 14
Research Article

Comparison of algorithms to generate event times conditional on time‐dependent covariates

Marie‐Pierre Sylvestre

Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McGill University, 1020 Pine Avenue West, Montreal, Que., Canada H3A 1A2

Search for more papers by this author
Michal Abrahamowicz

Corresponding Author

E-mail address: michal.abrahamowicz@mcgill.ca

E-mail address: michal@epimgh.mcgill.ca

Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McGill University, 1020 Pine Avenue West, Montreal, Que., Canada H3A 1A2

McGill University Health Centre, 687 Pine Avenue West, V Building, Montreal, Que., Canada H3A 1A1Search for more papers by this author
First published: 08 October 2007
Citations: 32

Abstract

The Cox proportional hazards model with time‐dependent covariates (TDC) is now a part of the standard statistical analysis toolbox in medical research. As new methods involving more complex modeling of time‐dependent variables are developed, simulations could often be used to systematically assess the performance of these models. Yet, generating event times conditional on TDC requires well‐designed and efficient algorithms. We compare two classes of such algorithms: permutational algorithms (PAs) and algorithms based on a binomial model. We also propose a modification of the PA to incorporate a rejection sampler. We performed a simulation study to assess the accuracy, stability, and speed of these algorithms in several scenarios. Both classes of algorithms generated data sets that, once analyzed, provided virtually unbiased estimates with comparable variances. In terms of computational efficiency, the PA with the rejection sampler reduced the time necessary to generate data by more than 50 per cent relative to alternative methods. The PAs also allowed more flexibility in the specification of the marginal distributions of event times and required less calibration. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Number of times cited according to CrossRef: 32

  • Nonlinear and time‐dependent effects of sparsely measured continuous time‐varying covariates in time‐to‐event analysis, Biometrical Journal, 10.1002/bimj.201900042, 62, 2, (492-515), (2020).
  • Two-part joint model for a longitudinal semicontinuous marker and a terminal event with application to metastatic colorectal cancer data, Biostatistics, 10.1093/biostatistics/kxaa012, (2020).
  • Generating Survival Times Using Cox Proportional Hazards Models with Cyclic and Piecewise Time-Varying Covariates, Statistics in Biosciences, 10.1007/s12561-020-09266-3, (2020).
  • Bootstrapping complex time‐to‐event data without individual patient data, with a view toward time‐dependent exposures, Statistics in Medicine, 10.1002/sim.8177, 38, 20, (3747-3763), (2019).
  • Missing data strategies for time‐varying confounders in comparative effectiveness studies of non‐missing time‐varying exposures and right‐censored outcomes, Statistics in Medicine, 10.1002/sim.8174, 38, 17, (3204-3220), (2019).
  • Generating survival times with time-varying covariates using the Lambert W Function, Communications in Statistics - Simulation and Computation, 10.1080/03610918.2019.1648822, (1-19), (2019).
  • Simulating Duration Data for the Cox Model, Political Science Research and Methods, 10.1017/psrm.2018.19, (1-8), (2018).
  • Authors' reply: Letter to the Editor: Regarding Karim et al. (SMMR, Vol 27, Issue 6, 2018), Statistical Methods in Medical Research, 10.1177/0962280218811186, (096228021881118), (2018).
  • On the necessity and design of studies comparing statistical methods, Biometrical Journal, 10.1002/bimj.201700129, 60, 1, (216-218), (2017).
  • Using Multiple Pharmacovigilance Models Improves the Timeliness of Signal Detection in Simulated Prospective Surveillance, Drug Safety, 10.1007/s40264-017-0555-9, 40, 11, (1119-1129), (2017).
  • Competing risks modeling of cumulative effects of time-varying drug exposures, Statistical Methods in Medical Research, 10.1177/0962280217720947, (096228021772094), (2017).
  • Guidelines for generating right-censored outcomes from a Cox model extended to accommodate time-varying covariates, Journal of Modern Applied Statistical Methods, 10.22237/jmasm/1493597100, 16, 1, (86-106), (2017).
  • Comparison of statistical approaches dealing with time-dependent confounding in drug effectiveness studies, Statistical Methods in Medical Research, 10.1177/0962280216668554, 27, 6, (1709-1722), (2016).
  • Martingale residual‐based method to control for confounders measured only in a validation sample in time‐to‐event analysis, Statistics in Medicine, 10.1002/sim.7012, 35, 25, (4588-4606), (2016).
  • Validation of the alternating conditional estimation algorithm for estimation of flexible extensions of Cox's proportional hazards model with nonlinear constraints on the parameters, Biometrical Journal, 10.1002/bimj.201500035, 58, 6, (1445-1464), (2016).
  • Comparison of Statistical Approaches for Dealing With Immortal Time Bias in Drug Effectiveness Studies, American Journal of Epidemiology, 10.1093/aje/kwv445, 184, 4, (325-335), (2016).
  • THE AUTHORS REPLY, American Journal of Epidemiology, 10.1093/aje/kww158, 184, 11, (857-858), (2016).
  • The impact of exposure model misspecification on signal detection in prospective pharmacovigilance, Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety, 10.1002/pds.3700, 24, 5, (456-467), (2014).
  • Sample size calculation for the proportional hazards model with a time-dependent covariate, Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, 10.1016/j.csda.2014.01.018, 74, (217-227), (2014).
  • Modeling exposure–lag–response associations with distributed lag non‐linear models, Statistics in Medicine, 10.1002/sim.5963, 33, 5, (881-899), (2013).
  • Data generation for the Cox proportional hazards model with time‐dependent covariates: a method for medical researchers, Statistics in Medicine, 10.1002/sim.5945, 33, 3, (436-454), (2013).
  • Flexible simulation of competing risks data following prespecified subdistribution hazards, Journal of Statistical Computation and Simulation, 10.1080/00949655.2013.793345, 84, 12, (2557-2576), (2013).
  • Simulating biologically plausible complex survival data, Statistics in Medicine, 10.1002/sim.5823, 32, 23, (4118-4134), (2013).
  • On the proportional hazards model for occupational and environmental case-control analyses, BMC Medical Research Methodology, 10.1186/1471-2288-13-18, 13, 1, (2013).
  • Comparison of Approaches to Weight Truncation for Marginal Structural Cox Models, Epidemiologic Methods, 10.1515/em-2012-0006, 2, 1, (1-20), (2013).
  • Generating survival times to simulate Cox proportional hazards models with time‐varying covariates, Statistics in Medicine, 10.1002/sim.5452, 31, 29, (3946-3958), (2012).
  • Use of alternative time scales in Cox proportional hazard models: implications for time‐varying environmental exposures, Statistics in Medicine, 10.1002/sim.5347, 31, 27, (3320-3327), (2012).
  • Comparison of alternative models for linking drug exposure with adverse effects, Statistics in Medicine, 10.1002/sim.4343, 31, 11-12, (1014-1030), (2011).
  • Flexible modeling of the effects of continuous prognostic factors in relative survival, Statistics in Medicine, 10.1002/sim.4208, 30, 12, (1351-1365), (2011).
  • A weighted Cox model for modelling time‐dependent exposures in the analysis of case–control studies, Statistics in Medicine, 10.1002/sim.3764, 29, 7‐8, (839-850), (2010).
  • Flexible modeling of the cumulative effects of time‐dependent exposures on the hazard, Statistics in Medicine, 10.1002/sim.3701, 28, 27, (3437-3453), (2009).
  • Simulating competing risks data in survival analysis, Statistics in Medicine, 10.1002/sim.3516, 28, 6, (956-971), (2009).

The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.