↓ Skip to main content

Testing the proportional hazards assumption in case-cohort analysis

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Research Methodology, July 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
102 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
106 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Testing the proportional hazards assumption in case-cohort analysis
Published in
BMC Medical Research Methodology, July 2013
DOI 10.1186/1471-2288-13-88
Pubmed ID
Authors

Xiaonan Xue, Xianhong Xie, Marc Gunter, Thomas E Rohan, Sylvia Wassertheil-Smoller, Gloria YF Ho, Dominic Cirillo, Herbert Yu, Howard D Strickler

Abstract

Case-cohort studies have become common in epidemiological studies of rare disease, with Cox regression models the principal method used in their analysis. However, no appropriate procedures to assess the assumption of proportional hazards of case-cohort Cox models have been proposed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 106 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 105 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 20%
Student > Master 16 15%
Researcher 12 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 6%
Other 6 6%
Other 14 13%
Unknown 31 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 29 27%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 7%
Mathematics 4 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 3%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 3 3%
Other 25 24%
Unknown 35 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 July 2013.
All research outputs
#14,102,908
of 23,881,329 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#1,342
of 2,109 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#105,077
of 196,824 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#18
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,881,329 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,109 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.5. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 196,824 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.