Joint Dynamic Models and Statistical Inference for Recurrent Competing Risks, Longitudinal Marker, and Health Status

Lili Tong; Piaomu Liu; Edsel Pena

Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2103.12903

Joint Dynamic Models and Statistical Inference for Recurrent Competing Risks, Longitudinal Marker, and Health Status

Lili Tong·Piaomu Liu·Edsel Pena

View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Consider a subject or unit in a longitudinal biomedical, public health, engineering, economic, or social science study which is being monitored over a possibly random duration. Over time this unit experiences competing recurrent events and a longitudinal marker transitions over a discrete state-space. In addition, its ``health or performance'' status also transitions over a discrete state-space with some states possibly absorbing states. A vector of covariates will also be associated with this unit. If there are absorbing states, of interest for this unit is its time-to-absorption of its health status process, which could be viewed as the unit's lifetime. Aside from being affected by its covariate vector, there could be associations among the recurrent competing risks processes, the longitudinal marker process, and the health status process in the sense that the time-evolution of each process is associated with the other processes. To obtain more realistic models and enhance inferential performance, a joint dynamic stochastic model for these components is proposed and statistical inference methods are developed. This joint model, formulated via counting processes and continuous-time Markov chains, has the potential of facilitating `personalized' interventions. This could enhance, for example, the implementation and adoption of precision medicine in medical settings. Semi-parametric and likelihood-based inferential methods for the model parameters are developed when a sample of these units is available. Finite-sample and asymptotic properties of estimators of model parameters, both finite- and infinite-dimensional, are obtained analytically or through simulation studies.

Explore related subjects

stat.ME

Keep this discovery

BibTeX RIS

Lili Tong, Piaomu Liu, Edsel Pena. 2021-03-24. Joint Dynamic Models and Statistical Inference for Recurrent Competing Risks, Longitudinal Marker, and Health Status. https://arxiv.org/abs/2103.12903

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Surprise Reduction and Nullification in Bayesian and Inverse Bayesian Inference under Ambiguous Prediction-Error Attribution

In non-stationary environments, prediction errors may signal environmental change or transient outliers, and adaptive systems must track such changes without overreacting to outliers. We distinguish surprise reduction, which updates beliefs to fit observations, from surprise nullification, which weakens constraints imposed by the predictive structure, and formalize both within Bayesian and inverse Bayesian (BIB) inference. Belief and likelihood updates are derived from variational objectives sharing a nullification strength, determined endogenously by minimizing surprise under the candidate post-update predictive distribution. In the Gaussian case, nullification expands belief and likelihood variances by a common factor relative to standard Bayesian updating, leaving the ratio unchanged. BIB thus defers attribution of the prediction error, committing to neither latent-state change nor observation-process uncertainty. The nullification strength is carried over as a candidate and is maintained or released according to the predictive surprise of the next observation. In a mean estimation task with outliers and changepoints, no scanned parameter setting of a Sage-Husa-type adaptive Kalman filter, fixed-strength BIB variant, or belief-forgetting-only variant outperforms BIB in both changepoint tracking and post-outlier stability. An oracle-informed reduced Bayesian model tracks changepoints better but is less stable after outliers. Although BIB maintains no explicit hypotheses about changepoints or outliers, it generates event-dependent dynamics. The learning rate increases after changepoints, whereas after outliers, nullification is released, and this increase is suppressed. Deferring attribution and letting subsequent observations differentiate the responses may constitute a principle of adaptive inference in non-stationary environments.

stat.ME↗

arXiv2026

Generalized Ridge Refitting for the Lasso and Prediction Improvement Bounds

We study a class of Lasso based estimators obtained by applying a quadratic correction on the Lasso equicorrelation set. The penalty matrix determines both the magnitude and geometry of the correction and contains, among other cases, the isotropic Lasso--Ridge correction, least squares refitting, Gram proportional interpolation between the Lasso and least squares, and coordinate specific penalties. We first derive a closed form representation and isolate the positive gain component of the resulting prediction improvement. We then control the remaining stochastic linear term in expectation by localizing the random signed equicorrelation model around a deterministic reference support. This yields a finite sample expectation bound that explicitly accounts for the randomness induced by Lasso model selection. The resulting decomposition provides a unified framework for understanding when Lasso based quadratic corrections can improve prediction.

stat.ME↗

arXiv2026

Discretization in covariate-adaptive randomization: gains and losses

Covariate-adaptive randomization(CAR) is widely implemented in clinical trials to balance prognostic covariates across treatment arms. Continuous covariates are often discretized into strata in practice, yet their consequences are not clearly understood. This paper provides a comprehensive study of the impact of discretization on both the CAR design process and the inferential results thereafter. We establish the asymptotic properties of both imbalance measures and treatment effect estimators under discretized and non-discretized settings. Practical recommendations are given on when and how discretization should be employed. We show that discretization in design is generally recommended, as it enhances robustness against model misspecification. However, if the true model is known, the most efficient strategy is to balance covariates according to that model in the design. The theoretical results are corroborated by extensive simulation studies and an empirical application to a diabetes trial dataset. Together, the results clarify the gains and losses of discretization in CAR and pave the way for learning impact of discretization to other designs and beyond.

stat.ME↗