Survival methods, including those using competing risk analysis, are not appropriate for intensive care unit outcome studies
- PMID: 16420653
- PMCID: PMC1550820
- DOI: 10.1186/cc3949
Survival methods, including those using competing risk analysis, are not appropriate for intensive care unit outcome studies
Abstract
The preferred analysis for studies of mortality among patients treated in an intensive care unit should compare the proportions of patients who died during hospitalization. Studies that look for prognostic covariates should use logistic regression. Survival methods, such as the proportional hazards model, or methods based on competing risk analysis are not appropriate because prolonged survival among patients that die during their hospitalization does not benefit the patient and, therefore, should not be measured in the statistical analysis.
Comment on
-
Evaluating mortality in intensive care units: contribution of competing risks analyses.Crit Care. 2006 Feb;10(1):R5. doi: 10.1186/cc3921. Crit Care. 2006. PMID: 16356211 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Fine JP, Gray RJ. A proportional hazards model for the subdistri-bution of a competing risk. J Am Stat Assoc. 1999;94:496–509.
-
- Finkelstein DM, Schoenfeld DA. Analyzing survival in the presence of an auxiliary variable. Stat Med. 1994;13:1747–1754. - PubMed
-
- Anonymous Randomized, placebo-controlled trial of lisofylline for early treatment of acute lung injury and acute respiratory distress syndrome. Critical Care Med. 2002;30:1–6. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
