Author
Listed:
- Tingxuan Wu
- Cindy Feng
- Longhai Li
Abstract
Accurate model performance assessment in survival analysis is imperative for robust predictions and informed decision-making. Traditional residual diagnostic tools like martingale and deviance residuals lack a well-characterized reference distribution for censored regression, making numerical statistical tests based on these residuals challenging. Recently, the introduction of Z-residuals for diagnosing survival models addresses this limitation. However, concerns arise from conventional methods that use the entire dataset for both model parameter estimation and residual assessment, which may cause optimistic biases. This article introduces cross-validatory Z-residuals as an innovative approach to address these limitations. Employing a cross-validation (CV) framework, the method systematically partitions the dataset into training and testing sets to reduce the optimistic bias. Our simulation studies demonstrate that, for goodness-of-fit tests and outlier detection, cross-validatory Z-residuals are significantly more powerful (e.g., power increased from 0.2 to 0.6). and more discriminative (e.g., AUC increased from 0.58 to 0.85) than Z-residuals without CV. We also compare the performance of Z-residuals with and without CV in identifying outliers in a real application that models the recurrence time of kidney infection patients. Our findings suggest that cross-validatory Z-residuals can identify outliers, which Z-residuals without CV fail to identify. The CV Z-residual is a more powerful tool than the No-CV Z-residual for checking survival models, particularly in goodness-of-fit tests and outlier detection. We have published a generic function, which is collected in an R package called Zresidual, for computing CV Z-residual for the output of the widely used survival R package.
Suggested Citation
Tingxuan Wu & Cindy Feng & Longhai Li, 2025.
"Cross-Validatory Z-Residual for Diagnosing Shared Frailty Models,"
The American Statistician, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 79(2), pages 198-211, April.
Handle:
RePEc:taf:amstat:v:79:y:2025:i:2:p:198-211
DOI: 10.1080/00031305.2024.2421370
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:taf:amstat:v:79:y:2025:i:2:p:198-211. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/UTAS20 .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.