Proportional hazards — where it appears
Named by 2 essays across one field — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.
The hazard ratio the follow-up chose
A treatment that halves the hazard for one year and then does nothing has a Cox hazard ratio of 0.5000 if the trial stops at one year, 0.7617 at three and 0.8194 at eight. Nothing about the treatment differs between those numbers. When hazards are not proportional the hazard ratio is an average, and the length of follow-up and the dropout rate choose its weights.
One test for a curve that might cross
The log-rank statistic and the differences in restricted mean survival at eleven horizons are one Gaussian vector under no effect, and its correlations are closed — from −0.461 at half a year to −0.949 at three, where the log-rank statistic is nearly the restricted mean itself. So one critical value, 2.374, prices the largest of all twelve. At 100 a side it keeps 93.6% of the log-rank test's power when the hazard is halved throughout and 98.5% of the best horizon's when the curves cross, where the log-rank test has none. Running both tests and keeping either rejection rejects 8.67% of trials with no effect.
Named alongside it
The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.
Kaplan–MeierLog-rank testStatistical powerCensoringClosed formCox modelCritical valueEstimandGaussian processHazardHazard ratioModel misspecification