Related Experiment Video
Updated: Nov 8, 2025

Establishing a Competing Risk Regression Nomogram Model for Survival Data
Published on: October 23, 2020
Restricted mean survival time versus conventional measures for treatment decision-making
Dae Hyun Kim1,2,3, Sandra M Shi1,2, Danette Carroll1
1Hinda and Arthur Marcus Institute for Aging Research, Hebrew SeniorLife, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Background/Objectives:
Restricted mean survival time (RMST) summarizes treatment effect in terms of a gain or loss in the event-free days. It remains uncertain whether communicating treatment benefit and harm using RMST-based summary is more effective than conventional summary based on absolute and relative risk reduction. We compared the effect of RMST-based approach and conventional approach on decisional conflict using an example of intensive versus standard blood pressure-lowering strategies.
Design:
On-line survey.
Setting:
A convenience sample of patients in the United States.
Participants:
Two hundred adults aged 65 and older with hypertension requiring anti-hypertensive treatment (response rate 85.5%).
Interventions:
Participants were randomly assigned to either RMST-based summary or conventional summary about the benefit and harm of blood pressure-lowering strategies.
Measurements:
Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS), ranging from 0 (no conflict) to 100 (high conflict), and preference for intensive blood pressure-lowering strategy.
Results:
Participants assigned to RMST-based approach (n = 100) and conventional approach (n = 100) had similar age (mean [standard deviation, SD]: 72.3 [5.6] vs 72.8 [5.5] years) and proportions of female (50 [50.0%] vs 61 [61.0%]) and white race (92 [92.0%] vs 92 [92.0%]). The mean (SD) DCS score was 25.2 (15.0) for RMST-based approach and 25.6 (14.1) for conventional approach (p = 0.84). The number (%) of participants who preferred intensive strategy was 10 (10.0%) for RMST-based approach and 14 (14.0%) for conventional approach (p = 0.52). The results were consistent in subgroups defined by age, sex, education level, cardiovascular disease status, and predicted mortality risk categories.
Conclusion:
In a sample of relatively healthy older adults with hypertension, RMST-based approach was as effective as conventional approach on decisional conflict about choosing a blood pressure-lowering strategy. This study provides proof-of-concept evidence that RMST-based approach can be used in conjunction with absolute and relative risk reduction for communicating treatment benefit and harm in a decision aid.
More Related Videos
06:46Competing-Risk Nomogram for Predicting Cancer-Specific Survival in Multiple Primary Colorectal Cancer Patients after Surgery
Published on: September 27, 2024
06:55Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting Propensity Score using the Military Health System Data Repository and National Death Index
Published on: January 8, 2020
Related Concept Videos
Comparing the Survival Analysis of Two or More Groups
Kaplan-Meier Approach
Cancer Survival Analysis
Actuarial Approach
Consider the example of a high-risk surgical procedure with significant early-stage mortality. A two-year clinical study is conducted,...
Survival Curves
The Kaplan-Meier estimator is the most common method for constructing survival curves. This...
Assumptions of Survival Analysis