ArticleAmerican journal of epidemiology2025
Why use methods that require proportional hazards?
Article in American journal of epidemiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Effect of Covariate Adjustment for Cox Regression in Cardiovascular Outcome Trials.Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science · 2026Article
- Initiation of Gabapentin with Opioids and Risk of Respiratory Cardiovascular and Opioid-Related Adverse Events Following Surgery for Breast Cancer.Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2026Article
- Beyond classical models: LLM-driven survival analysis for breast cancer prognosis using European cancer registry data.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2026Article
- GLP-1 receptor agonists and risk of all cause and cause specific acute pancreatitis: target trial emulation.BMJ medicine · 2026Article
- Glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist discontinuation and risks of major adverse cardiovascular events in adults with type 2 diabetes: target trial emulation.BMJ medicine · 2026Article
- How hazard ratios can mislead and why it matters in practice.European journal of epidemiology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
We recently questioned the utility of testing for proportional hazards in survival analysis. Here, we expand on why the proportional hazards assumption is both implausible and unnecessary in most medical studies, particularly in randomized trials. We conclude that using survival analysis methods that do not rely on proportional hazards is typically the preferred course of action.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.