TL;DR
This study investigates how misspecifying the baseline hazard or frailty distribution in shared frailty survival models affects bias and risk estimates, emphasizing the need for flexible modeling and proper fit assessment.
Contribution
It provides a comprehensive simulation analysis of the effects of model misspecification in shared frailty survival models, highlighting the importance of flexible approaches and fit evaluation.
Findings
Misspecifying the baseline hazard causes biased risk estimates.
Incorrect frailty distribution affects heterogeneity measures.
Flexible models reduce bias in survival analysis.
Abstract
Survival models incorporating random effects to account for unmeasured heterogeneity are being increasingly used in biostatistical and applied research. Specifically, unmeasured covariates whose lack of inclusion in the model would lead to biased, inefficient results are commonly modelled by including a subject-specific (or cluster-specific) frailty term that follows a given distribution (e.g. Gamma or log-Normal). Despite that, in the context of parametric frailty models little is known about the impact of misspecifying the baseline hazard, the frailty distribution, or both. Therefore, our aim is to quantify the impact of such misspecification in a wide variety of clinically plausible scenarios via Monte Carlo simulation, using open source software readily available to applied researchers. We generate clustered survival data assuming various baseline hazard functions, including mixture…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Code & Models
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
