医疗保健交叉生存曲线分析的决策理论方法

Elie Appelbaum , Moshe Leshno , Eitan Prisman , Eliezer Z. Prisman
{"title":"医疗保健交叉生存曲线分析的决策理论方法","authors":"Elie Appelbaum ,&nbsp;Moshe Leshno ,&nbsp;Eitan Prisman ,&nbsp;Eliezer Z. Prisman","doi":"10.1016/j.health.2025.100405","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The problem of crossing Kaplan–Meier curves has not been solved in the medical research literature to date. This paper integrates survival curve comparisons into decision theory, providing a theoretical framework and a solution to the problem of crossing Kaplan–Meier curves. The application of decision theory allows us to apply stochastic dominance concepts and risk preference attributes to compare treatments even when standard Kaplan–Meier curves cross. The paper shows that as additional risk preference attributes are adopted, Kaplan–Meier curves can be ranked under weaker restrictions, namely with higher orders of stochastic dominance. Consequently, even Kaplan–Meier curves that cross may be ranked. The method we present allows us to extract all possible information from survival functions; hence, superior treatments that cannot be identified using standard Kaplan–Meier curves may become identifiable. Our methodology is applied to two examples of published empirical medical studies. We show that treatments deemed non-comparable because their Kaplan–Meier curves intersect can be compared using our method.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":73222,"journal":{"name":"Healthcare analytics (New York, N.Y.)","volume":"8 ","pages":"Article 100405"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A decision-theoretic method for analyzing crossing survival curves in healthcare\",\"authors\":\"Elie Appelbaum ,&nbsp;Moshe Leshno ,&nbsp;Eitan Prisman ,&nbsp;Eliezer Z. Prisman\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.health.2025.100405\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>The problem of crossing Kaplan–Meier curves has not been solved in the medical research literature to date. This paper integrates survival curve comparisons into decision theory, providing a theoretical framework and a solution to the problem of crossing Kaplan–Meier curves. The application of decision theory allows us to apply stochastic dominance concepts and risk preference attributes to compare treatments even when standard Kaplan–Meier curves cross. The paper shows that as additional risk preference attributes are adopted, Kaplan–Meier curves can be ranked under weaker restrictions, namely with higher orders of stochastic dominance. Consequently, even Kaplan–Meier curves that cross may be ranked. The method we present allows us to extract all possible information from survival functions; hence, superior treatments that cannot be identified using standard Kaplan–Meier curves may become identifiable. Our methodology is applied to two examples of published empirical medical studies. We show that treatments deemed non-comparable because their Kaplan–Meier curves intersect can be compared using our method.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73222,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Healthcare analytics (New York, N.Y.)\",\"volume\":\"8 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100405\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Healthcare analytics (New York, N.Y.)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772442525000243\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Healthcare analytics (New York, N.Y.)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772442525000243","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

迄今为止,在医学研究文献中,卡普兰-迈耶曲线的交叉问题尚未得到解决。本文将生存曲线比较整合到决策理论中,为Kaplan-Meier曲线交叉问题提供了一个理论框架和解决方案。决策理论的应用使我们能够应用随机优势概念和风险偏好属性来比较处理,即使在标准Kaplan-Meier曲线交叉时也是如此。本文表明,通过引入额外的风险偏好属性,Kaplan-Meier曲线可以在较弱的约束下排序,即具有较高的随机优势阶数。因此,即使交叉的Kaplan-Meier曲线也可以排序。我们提出的方法允许我们从生存函数中提取所有可能的信息;因此,使用标准Kaplan-Meier曲线无法识别的优越治疗方法可能会被识别出来。我们的方法应用于已发表的实证医学研究的两个例子。我们表明,治疗被认为是不可比较的,因为它们的Kaplan-Meier曲线相交,可以使用我们的方法进行比较。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A decision-theoretic method for analyzing crossing survival curves in healthcare
The problem of crossing Kaplan–Meier curves has not been solved in the medical research literature to date. This paper integrates survival curve comparisons into decision theory, providing a theoretical framework and a solution to the problem of crossing Kaplan–Meier curves. The application of decision theory allows us to apply stochastic dominance concepts and risk preference attributes to compare treatments even when standard Kaplan–Meier curves cross. The paper shows that as additional risk preference attributes are adopted, Kaplan–Meier curves can be ranked under weaker restrictions, namely with higher orders of stochastic dominance. Consequently, even Kaplan–Meier curves that cross may be ranked. The method we present allows us to extract all possible information from survival functions; hence, superior treatments that cannot be identified using standard Kaplan–Meier curves may become identifiable. Our methodology is applied to two examples of published empirical medical studies. We show that treatments deemed non-comparable because their Kaplan–Meier curves intersect can be compared using our method.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Healthcare analytics (New York, N.Y.)
Healthcare analytics (New York, N.Y.) Applied Mathematics, Modelling and Simulation, Nursing and Health Professions (General)
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
79 days
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信