Table 4.
Simulation results: Mean (×103) and (sd) (×103). Censoring rate: 30%. For each scenario, the theoretical optimal value (×103) is 31, 181, 1079, and −389, respectively.
| kernel | T | RIST-R1 | RIST-R2 | ICO | DR | Cox | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Linear | 0 (26) | 1 (31) | 2 (28) | −10 (40) | −20 (63) | −26 (33) |
| Gaussian | −17 (44) | −10 (34) | −7 (37) | −18 (45) | −48 (65) | ||
| 2 | Linear | 22 (113) | 17 (105) | −14 (126) | −110 (136) | −193 (133) | 65 (63) |
| Gaussian | −39 (115) | −25 (101) | −62 (113) | −164 (119) | −285 (112) | ||
| 3 | Linear | 785 (52) | 768 (53) | 771 (52) | 737 (95) | 667 (124) | 763 (61) |
| Gaussian | 896 (61) | 810 (54) | 854 (69) | 817 (124) | 679 (123) | ||
| 4 | Linear | −453 (37) | −465 (46) | −448 (27) | −461 (42) | −471 (54) | −457 (32) |
| Gaussian | −465 (35) | −477 (42) | −456 (27) | −474 (41) | −505 (48) |
T: using true survival time as weight; RIST-R1 and RIST-R2: using the estimated R1 and R2 respectively as weights, while the conditional expectations are estimated using recursively imputed survival trees; ICO: inverse probability of censoring weighted learning; DR: doubly robust outcome weighted learning; Cox: Cox proportional hazards model using covariate-treatment interactions.