Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Allow specification of censoring model when calculating IPCW weighted Brier/Graf Score #164

Open
adibender opened this issue Nov 11, 2020 · 4 comments
Labels
Type: Enhancement Type: Measures Issues/Discussions related to survival measures

Comments

@adibender
Copy link
Collaborator

adibender commented Nov 11, 2020

In theory, it would also be possible to specify the learner which is used to learn the censoring model, tune the parameters, etc.... For now I'd restrict to simple parametric learner, e.g. coxph, but raises questions. E.g. what to do in n <p cases.

@RaphaelS1
Copy link
Collaborator

Do we really want to do this? I know this is possible in {pec} but it has no good theoretical justification. How do you validate the censoring model? What about data bias which just gets propagated forward by the second learner. I'm not convinced this is something we should implement

@adibender
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Yes, vlaidation of the censoring model is a problem. But we should allow it should be able to
a) recreate results from literature
b) use it for comparison when they develop alternatives or similar

Is it hard to do technically?

@RaphaelS1
Copy link
Collaborator

Is it hard to do technically?

Nope

recreate results from literature

It's an interesting argument. Okay, let's do it. I'll bump this up my list

@bblodfon
Copy link
Collaborator

@bblodfon bblodfon added the Type: Measures Issues/Discussions related to survival measures label Oct 25, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Type: Enhancement Type: Measures Issues/Discussions related to survival measures
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants