Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2011 Dec 20.
Published in final edited form as: Stat Med. 2010 Oct 20;29(29):3004–3016. doi: 10.1002/sim.4079

Table II.

Percentage of tree models that identified the correct splitting covariate: assessed separately at each node and also for all four possible splits combined. Simulation results from models A and B, based on 1000 datasets of N = 300 observations each.

Statistic* (per cent Missing) Model A
Model B
Method h1 h2 h3 h4§ Total (95 per cent CI) h1 h2 h3 h4§ Total (95 per cent CI)
FLD (0 per cent) COMP 100 97.60 99.90 91.69 89.3 (85.80, 92.80) 100 83.80 97.60 98.16 80.3 (75.80, 84.80)
FLD (10 per cent) COBS 100 95.40 99.30 91.64 86.5 (82.42, 90.58) 100 79.10 93.70 97.44 72.1 (66.75, 77.45)
SS 100 94.90 99.70 92.08 87.1 (83.31, 90.89) 100 57.00 93.90 97.44 51.5 (45.84, 57.16)
CS 99.80 94.29 99.80 92.07 86.5 (82.63, 90.37) 100 74.80 98.00 97.35 71.3 (66.18, 76.42)
MI-1 99.70 95.89 100 92.08 87.9 (84.21, 91.59) 99.90 73.37 97.60 97.74 69.6 (64.39, 74.81)
MI-10 99.90 95.90 99.90 92.18 87.9 (84.21, 91.59) 100 76.20 97.80 97.96 72.7 (67.66, 77.74)
FLD (25 per cent) COBS 100 90.70 93.70 90.72 77.4 (71.94, 82.86) 100 66.70 80.10 96.63 51.7 (44.97, 58.03)
SS 99.80 84.57 97.29 91.56 74.8 (69.89, 79.71) 99.70 27.88 82.65 96.84 22.1 (17.40, 26.80)
CS 97.30 79.96 99.08 89.42 69.9 (64.71, 75.09) 98.10 50.25 96.63 94.20 45.8 (40.16, 51.43)
MI-1 95.70 86.65 99.90 91.54 75.6 (70.73, 80.46) 97.60 55.33 98.67 96.16 51.6 (45.94, 57.26)
MI-10 97.30 85.30 99.90 92.29 76.2 (71.38, 81.02) 98.70 56.74 98.28 96.62 53.9 (48.26, 59.54)
FLD (40 per cent) COBS 100 79.50 60.40 88.08 41.7 (34.50, 48.90) 100 51.40 37.30 91.15 17.7 (12.12, 23.28)
SS 99.00 69.90 72.83 89.04 43.9 (38.28, 49.52) 97.80 11.96 39.47 91.71 5.1 (2.61, 7.59)
CS 90.90 53.14 82.51 84.53 38.3 (32.80, 43.80) 92.50 26.92 88.54 90.96 22.5 (17.7, 27.23)
MI-1 82.30 73.03 99.88 90.88 54.6 (48.97, 60.23) 83.30 29.65 99.28 95.16 23.7 (18.89, 28.51)
MI-10 87.10 67.16 99.77 92.06 53.7 (48.06, 59.34) 87.60 29.79 98.63 95.14 24.9 (20.00, 29.79)
LR (0 per cent) COMP 99.90 95.70 99.90 90.68 86.4 (81.40, 89.40) 100 86.40 96.80 97.31 81.5 (77.11, 85.89)
LR (10 per cent) COBS 99.90 93.29 99.00 90.39 83.3 (78.85, 87.75) 100 82.60 91.80 96.41 73 (67.70, 78.30)
SS 99.80 93.89 99.40 90.73 84.7 (80.63, 88.77) 100 64.90 92.00 96.85 57.8 (52.21, 63.39)
CS 99.20 88.41 99.40 89.45 79.4 (74.82, 83.98) 100 71.60 97.10 95.57 66.4 (61.05, 71.75)
MI-1 99.50 93.27 99.80 90.94 84.1 (79.96, 88.24) 99.90 78.18 96.80 97.00 72.7 (67.34, 77.46)
MI-10 99.50 94.17 99.90 90.74 84.9 (80.85, 88.95) 100 78.40 97.50 96.62 73.6 (68.61, 78.59)
LR (25 per cent) COBS 100 90.00 92.80 89.22 74.6 (68.91, 80.29) 100 68.9 76.20 95.80 50.5 (43.97, 57.03)
SS 99.60 84.94 96.69 90.34 73.7 (68.72, 78.68) 99.30 35.55 78.55 95.51 25.8 (20.85, 30.75)
CS 94.80 68.57 96.20 87.17 58.2 (52.62, 63.78) 96.40 41.49 93.88 93.48 38.3 (32.80, 43.80)
MI-1 93.80 85.29 99.89 90.18 72.3 (67.24, 77.36) 94.20 57.64 97.66 95.43 51.6 (45.94, 58.55)
MI-10 94.80 82.17 99.89 91.13 70.6 (65.49, 75.76) 96.00 58.75 98.02 95.54 52.9 (47.25, 58.55)
LR (40 per cent) COBS 99.90 79.38 53.45 83.15 35.0 (28.03, 41.97) 100 38.0 28.60 83.92 8.7 (4.58, 12.82)
SS 97.70 72.26 67.35 86.62 41.4 (35.83, 46.97) 96.00 19.90 31.25 86.33 5.8 (3.16, 8.45)
CS 90.70 43.66 68.47 81.00 28.3 (23.20. 33.40) 89.30 18.14 72.79 87.23 13.3 (9.46, 17.14)
MI-1 75.10 66.31 98.27 88.89 44.7 (39.07, 50.33) 74.20 34.50 91.71 94.16 23.8 (18.98, 28.62)
MI-10 80.00 62.63 97.75 91.56 45.4 (39.77, 51.03) 78.60 34.35 96.69 93.55 24.8 (19.91, 29.69)
*

FLD, reduction in full exponential likelihood deviance; LR, two-sample log rank.

COMP, full simulated data; COBS, completely observed cases only; SS, surrogate splitting; CS, Conversano and Siciliano's single imputation; MI-1, multiple imputation with one draw of normal error; and MI-10, multiple imputation with 10 draws of normal error.

Correct variable selection at nodes h2 and h3 is conditional on correct variable selection at node h1.

§

Correct variable selection at node h4 is conditional on correct variable selection at both nodes h1 and h3.