ArticleStatistics in medicine2025
Collaborative Inference for Accelerated Failure Time Model Using Clinical Center-Level Summary Statistics.
Article in Statistics in medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparing the performance of statistical and machine learning survival models in predicting timing and determinants of postnatal care in Rwanda.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2026Article
- Collaborative Inference for Accelerated Failure Time Model Using Clinical Center-Level Summary Statistics.Statistics in medicine · 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Multi-center clinical research offers numerous advantages, including the ability to obtain a larger combined sample size and to reduce center-specific insufficiency and imbalance in event rates, ultimately leading to more robust and generalizable findings. This paper develops a collaborative analytic framework for survival data analysis using summary statistics and the Accelerated Failure Time (AFT) model, a popular alternative to the Cox proportional hazards model for the analysis of time-to-event data. The AFT model directly accounts for the effects of the covariates on times to event, rather than through hazard functions, with no proportionality assumption required compared to the Cox model. Given that it bypasses the construction of partial likelihood, it gives rise to more flexibility in integrative analyses of survival data collected from multiple clinical sites. Our proposed distributed inference method focuses on a class of parametric AFT models with Weibull, log-normal, and log-logistic distributions for time-to-event outcomes, with a distributed likelihood ratio test established under the generalized gamma distribution to assess the goodness-of-fit across different candidate parametric AFT models. We present large-sample properties for the proposed distributed method and illustrate its performance through simulation experiments and a real-world data example on kidney transplantation.
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.