IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/ijbist/v20y2024i2p491-506n1007.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Revisiting incidence rates comparison under right censorship

Author

Listed:
  • Martínez-Camblor Pablo

    (Department of Anesthesiology, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Lebanon, NH, USA)

  • Díaz-Coto Susana

    (Department of Epidemiology, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Lebanon, NH, USA)

Abstract

Data description is the first step for understanding the nature of the problem at hand. Usually, it is a simple task that does not require any particular assumption. However, the interpretation of the used descriptive measures can be a source of confusion and misunderstanding. The incidence rate is the quotient between the number of observed events and the sum of time that the studied population was at risk of having this event (person-time). Despite this apparently simple definition, its interpretation is not free of complexity. In this piece of research, we revisit the incidence rate estimator under right-censorship. We analyze the effect that the censoring time distribution can have on the observed results, and its relevance in the comparison of two or more incidence rates. We propose a solution for limiting the impact that the data collection process can have on the results of the hypothesis testing. We explore the finite-sample behavior of the considered estimators from Monte Carlo simulations. Two examples based on synthetic data illustrate the considered problem. The R code and data used are provided as Supplementary Material.

Suggested Citation

  • Martínez-Camblor Pablo & Díaz-Coto Susana, 2024. "Revisiting incidence rates comparison under right censorship," The International Journal of Biostatistics, De Gruyter, vol. 20(2), pages 491-506.
    • Handle: RePEc:bpj:ijbist:v:20:y:2024:i:2:p:491-506:n:1007
    DOI: 10.1515/ijb-2023-0025
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1515/ijb-2023-0025
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1515/ijb-2023-0025?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bpj:ijbist:v:20:y:2024:i:2:p:491-506:n:1007. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyter.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.