Performance evaluation of survival regression models in analysing Swedish dental implant complication data with frailty
Author
Abstract
Suggested Citation
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0245111
Download full text from publisher
References listed on IDEAS
- Xudong Du & Mier Li & Ping Zhu & Ju Wang & Lisha Hou & Jijie Li & Hongdao Meng & Muke Zhou & Cairong Zhu, 2018. "Comparison of the flexible parametric survival model and Cox model in estimating Markov transition probabilities using real-world data," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(8), pages 1-13, August.
- Nicola Orsini, 2013. "Review of Flexible Parametric Survival Analysis Using Stata: Beyond the Cox Model by Patrick Royston and Paul C. Lambert," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 13(1), pages 212-216, March.
Citations
Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
Cited by:
- Adeniyi Francis Fagbamigbe & Emma Norrman & Christina Bergh & Ulla-Britt Wennerholm & Max Petzold, 2021. "Comparison of the performances of survival analysis regression models for analysis of conception modes and risk of type-1 diabetes among 1985–2015 Swedish birth cohort," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(6), pages 1-23, June.
Most related items
These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.- Adeniyi Francis Fagbamigbe & Emma Norrman & Christina Bergh & Ulla-Britt Wennerholm & Max Petzold, 2021. "Comparison of the performances of survival analysis regression models for analysis of conception modes and risk of type-1 diabetes among 1985–2015 Swedish birth cohort," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(6), pages 1-23, June.
- Ged Dempsey & Dan Hungerford & Phil McHale & Lauren McGarey & Edward Benison & Ben Morton, 2020. "Long term outcomes for elderly patients after emergency intensive care admission: A cohort study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(10), pages 1-14, October.
- Mark Sculpher & Stephen Palmer, 2020. "After 20 Years of Using Economic Evaluation, Should NICE be Considered a Methods Innovator?," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 38(3), pages 247-257, March.
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:plo:pone00:0245111. 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.
If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.