Author
Listed:
- Shimokawa Asanao
(Department of Mathematical information Science, Tokyo University of Science, 1-3 Kagurazaka, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo 162-8601, Japan)
- Kawasaki Yohei
- Miyaoka Etsuo
(Department of Mathematics, Tokyo University of Science, Tokyo, Japan)
Abstract
We compare splitting methods for constructing survival trees that are used as a model of survival time based on covariates. A number of splitting criteria on the classification and regression tree (CART) have been proposed by various authors, and we compare nine criteria through simulations. Comparative studies have been restricted to criteria that suppose the survival model for each terminal node in the final tree as a non-parametric model. As the main results, the criteria using the exponential log-likelihood loss, log-rank test statistics, the deviance residual under the proportional hazard model, or square error of martingale residual are recommended when it appears that the data have constant hazard with the passage of time. On the other hand, when the data are thought to have decreasing hazard with passage of time, the criterion using the two-sample test statistic, or square error of deviance residual would be optimal. Moreover, when the data are thought to have increasing hazard with the passage of time, the criterion using the exponential log-likelihood loss, or impurity that combines observed times and the proportion of censored observations would be the best. We also present the results of an actual medical research to show the utility of survival trees.
Suggested Citation
Shimokawa Asanao & Kawasaki Yohei & Miyaoka Etsuo, 2015.
"Comparison of Splitting Methods on Survival Tree,"
The International Journal of Biostatistics, De Gruyter, vol. 11(1), pages 175-188, May.
Handle:
RePEc:bpj:ijbist:v:11:y:2015:i:1:p:175-188:n:5
DOI: 10.1515/ijb-2014-0029
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bpj:ijbist:v:11:y:2015:i:1:p:175-188:n:5. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyter.com .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.