Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T17:29:03.338Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Modelling heterogeneity in survival data

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 July 2016

Philip Hougaard
Philip Hougaard*
Affiliation:
Novo Research Institute
*
∗ Postal address: Biostatistical Department, Novo Research Institute, Novo Alle, 2880 Bagsværd, Denmark.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Ordinary survival models implicitly assume that all individuals in a group have the same risk of death. It may, however, be relevant to consider the group as heterogeneous, i.e. a mixture of individuals with different risks. For example, after an operation each individual may have constant hazard of death. If risk factors are not included, the group shows decreasing hazard. This offers two fundamentally different interpretations of the same data. For instance, Weibull distributions with shape parameter less than 1 can be generated as mixtures of constant individual hazards. In a proportional hazards model, neglect of a subset of the important covariates leads to biased estimates of the other regression coefficients. Different choices of distributions for the unobserved covariates are discussed, including binary, gamma, inverse Gaussian and positive stable distributions, which show both qualitative and quantitative differences. For instance, the heterogeneity distribution can be either identifiable or unidentifiable. Both mathematical and interpretational consequences of the choice of distribution are considered. Heterogeneity can be evaluated by the variance of the logarithm of the mixture distribution. Examples include occupational mortality, myocardial infarction and diabetes.

Keywords

PROPORTIONAL HAZARDSOMITTED COVARIATESMIXTURESINVERSE GAUSSIANGAMMA DISTRIBUTIONSSTABLE DISTRIBUTIONS
Type
Short Communications
Information
Journal of Applied Probability , Volume 28 , Issue 3 , September 1991 , pp. 695 - 701
Copyright
Copyright © Applied Probability Trust 1991 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aalen, O. O. (1988) Heterogeneity in survival analysis. Statist. Med. 7, 1121–1137.Google Scholar
Andersen, O. (1985) Dødelighed og erhverv 1970–80. Danmarks Statistik, Copenhagen, Denmark.Google Scholar
Bar-Lev, S. K. and Enis, P. (1986) Reproducibility and natural exponential families with power variance functions. Ann. Statist. 14, 1507–1522.Google Scholar
Borch–Johnsen, K., Andersen, P. K. and Deckert, T. (1985) The effect of proteinuria on relative mortality in Type 1 (insulin-dependent) diabetes mellitus. Diabetologia 28, 590–596.Google Scholar
Heckman, J. J. and Singer, B. (1982) The identification problem in econometric models for duration data. In Advances in Econometrics, ed. Hildenbrand, W., Cambridge, pp. 39–77.Google Scholar
Hougaard, P. (1986) Survival models for heterogeneous populations derived from stable distributions. Biometrika 73, 387–396.Google Scholar
Hougaard, P. (1987) Modelling multivariate survival. Scand. J. Statist. 14, 291–304.Google Scholar
Jørgensen, B. (1987). Exponential dispersion models. J. R. Statist. Soc. B 49, 127–162.Google Scholar
Manton, K. G., Stallard, E. and Vaupel, J. W. (1986) Alternative models for the heterogeneity of mortality risks among the aged. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 81, 635–644.Google Scholar