Statistical methods for clustered competing risk data when the event types are only available in a training dataset

Yujie Wu et al.

Statistical Methods In Medical Research2026https://doi.org/10.1177/09622802251415022article
ABDC B
Weight
0.50

What the paper says

We develop methods to analyze clustered competing risks data when the event types are only available in a training dataset and are missing in the main study. We propose to estimate the exposure effects through the cause-specific proportional hazards frailty model where random effects are introduced into the model to account for the within-cluster correlation. We propose a weighted penalized partial likelihood method where the weights represent the probabilities of the occurrence of events, and the weights can be obtained by fitting a classification model for the event types on the training dataset. Alternatively, we propose an imputation approach where the missing event types are imputed based on the predictions from the classification model. We derive the analytical variances, and evaluate the finite sample properties of our methods in an extensive simulation study. As an illustrative example, we apply our methods to estimate the associations between tinnitus and metabolic, sensory and metabolic+sensory hearing loss in the Conservation of Hearing Study Audiology Assessment Arm.

Open paper page →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/09622802251415022

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{yujie2026,
  title        = {{Statistical methods for clustered competing risk data when the event types are only available in a training dataset}},
  author       = {Yujie Wu et al.},
  journal      = {Statistical Methods In Medical Research},
  year         = {2026},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/09622802251415022},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

Statistical methods for clustered competing risk data when the event types are only available in a training dataset

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.


Evidence weight

0.50

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20
M · momentum0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.