IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cla/levrem/321307000000000729.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Simpson’s Paradox for the Cox Model

Author

Listed:
  • Clelia Di Serio
  • Yosef Rinott
  • Marco Scarsini

Abstract

In the context of survival analysis, we define a covariate X as protective (detrimental) for the failure time T if the conditional distribution of [T | X = x] is stochastically increasing (decreasing) as a function of x. In the presence of another covariate Y, there exist situations where [T | X = x, Y = y] is stochastically decreasing in x for each fixed y, but [T | X = x] is stochastically increasing. When studying causal effects and influence of covariates on a failure time, this state of affairs appears paradoxical and raises the question of whether X should be considered protective or detrimental. In a biomedical framework, for instance when X is a treatment dose, such a question has obvious practical importance. Situations of this kind may be seen as a version of Simpson’s paradox. In this paper we study this phenomenon in terms of the well-known Cox model. More specifically, we analyze conditions on the parameters of the model and the type of dependence between X and Y required for the paradox to hold. Among other things, we show that the paradox may hold for residual failure times conditioned on T > t even when the covariates X and Y are independent. This is due to the fact that independent covariates may become dependent when conditioned on the failure time being larger than t.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Clelia Di Serio & Yosef Rinott & Marco Scarsini, 2007. "Simpson’s Paradox for the Cox Model," Levine's Bibliography 321307000000000729, UCLA Department of Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:cla:levrem:321307000000000729
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://ratio.huji.ac.il/dp/dp441.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. A. G. DiRienzo & S. W. Lagakos, 2001. "Effects of model misspecification on tests of no randomized treatment effect arising from Cox’s proportional hazards model," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 63(4), pages 745-757.
    2. Greg DiRienzo, 2004. "The Effects of Misspecifying Cox's Regression Model on Randomized Treatment Group Comparisons," Harvard University Biostatistics Working Paper Series 1003, Berkeley Electronic Press.
    3. Chen H.Y., 2002. "Double-Semiparametric Method for Missing Covariates in Cox Regression Models," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 97, pages 565-576, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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.
    1. Paul Frédéric Blanche & Anders Holt & Thomas Scheike, 2023. "On logistic regression with right censored data, with or without competing risks, and its use for estimating treatment effects," Lifetime Data Analysis: An International Journal Devoted to Statistical Methods and Applications for Time-to-Event Data, Springer, vol. 29(2), pages 441-482, April.
    2. Frank Eriksson & Torben Martinussen & Søren Feodor Nielsen, 2020. "Large sample results for frequentist multiple imputation for Cox regression with missing covariate data," Annals of the Institute of Statistical Mathematics, Springer;The Institute of Statistical Mathematics, vol. 72(4), pages 969-996, August.
    3. A. G. DiRienzo, 2003. "Nonparametric Comparison of Two Survival-Time Distributions in the Presence of Dependent Censoring," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 59(3), pages 497-504, September.
    4. Hattori, Satoshi, 2006. "Some properties of misspecified additive hazards models," Statistics & Probability Letters, Elsevier, vol. 76(15), pages 1641-1646, September.
    5. Clelia Di Serio & Yosef Rinott & Marco Scarsini, 2009. "Simpson's Paradox in Survival Models," Scandinavian Journal of Statistics, Danish Society for Theoretical Statistics;Finnish Statistical Society;Norwegian Statistical Association;Swedish Statistical Association, vol. 36(3), pages 463-480, September.
    6. Hattori, Satoshi, 2012. "Testing the no-treatment effect based on a possibly misspecified accelerated failure time model," Statistics & Probability Letters, Elsevier, vol. 82(2), pages 371-377.
    7. Jane Paik Kim, 2013. "A Note on Using Regression Models to Analyze Randomized Trials: Asymptotically Valid Hypothesis Tests Despite Incorrectly Specified Models," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 69(1), pages 282-289, March.
    8. Paul Gustafson, 2007. "On Robustness and Model Flexibility in Survival Analysis: Transformed Hazard Models and Average Effects," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 63(1), pages 69-77, March.
    9. Ting Ye & Jun Shao, 2020. "Robust tests for treatment effect in survival analysis under covariate‐adaptive randomization," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 82(5), pages 1301-1323, December.
    10. Peng He & Frank Eriksson & Thomas H. Scheike & Mei-Jie Zhang, 2016. "A Proportional Hazards Regression Model for the Subdistribution with Covariates-adjusted Censoring Weight for Competing Risks Data," Scandinavian Journal of Statistics, Danish Society for Theoretical Statistics;Finnish Statistical Society;Norwegian Statistical Association;Swedish Statistical Association, vol. 43(1), pages 103-122, March.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:cla:levrem:321307000000000729. 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: David K. Levine (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.dklevine.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.