Abstract
Survival analysis has found widespread applications in medicine in the last 10-15 years. However, there has been no published review of the use and presentation of survival analyses. We have carried out a systematic review of the research papers published between October and December 1991 in five clinical oncology journals. A total of 132 papers were reviewed. We looked at several aspects of study design, data handling, analysis and presentation of the results. We found that almost half of the papers did not give any summary of length of follow-up; that in 62% of papers at least one end point was not clearly defined; and that both logrank and multivariate analyses were frequently reported at most only as P-values [63/84 (75%) and 22/47 (47%) respectively]. Furthermore, although many studies were small, uncertainty of the estimates was rarely indicated [in 13/84 (15%) logrank and 16/47 (34%) multivariate results]. The procedure for categorisation of continuous variables in logrank analyses was explained in only 8/49 (16%) papers. The quality of graphs was felt to be poor in 43/117 (37%) papers which included at least one survival curve. To address some of the presentational inadequacies found in this review we include new suggested guidelines for the presentation of survival analyses in medical journals. These would complement the statistical guidelines recommended by several clinical oncology journals.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 24 print issues and online access
$259.00 per year
only $10.79 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on Springer Link
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Similar content being viewed by others
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Altman, D., De Stavola, B., Love, S. et al. Review of survival analyses published in cancer journals. Br J Cancer 72, 511–518 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.1995.364
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.1995.364
This article is cited by
-
Isolating the effect of confounding from the observed survival benefit of screening participants — a methodological approach illustrated by data from the German mammography screening programme
BMC Medicine (2024)
-
Bioinformatics Analysis in the Identification of Prognostic Signatures for ER-Negative Breast Cancer Data
Journal of the Indian Society for Probability and Statistics (2024)
-
Induction therapy with hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy enhances the efficacy of lenvatinib and pd1 inhibitors in treating hepatocellular carcinoma patients with portal vein tumor thrombosis
Journal of Gastroenterology (2023)
-
A Generalized Additive Hazards Model for the Analysis of Lifetime Data
Journal of the Indian Society for Probability and Statistics (2023)
-
Additive hazards quantile model
Metrika (2023)