Table 4.
Model comparison with different distributional assumptions
| Model | Baseline hazard distribution | Frailty distribution | Frailty variance (θ, p-value) |
AIC | BIC | LRR |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cox-model | NA | Gamma | 0.05, < 0.001 | 239,411 | 239,609 | − 119,683 |
| Shard frailty | Exponential | Gamma | 0.06, < 0.001 | 76,330.47 | 76,247.13 | −38,141.24 |
| Shard frailty | Weibull | Gamma | 0.06, < 0.001 | 76,168.05 | 76,393.73 | −38,059.24 |
| Shard frailty | Gompertz | Gamma | 0.06, < 0.001 | 76,017.40 | 76,243.08 | −37,983.70 |
| Shard frailty | Log-logistic | Gamma | The model did not converge | |||
| Shard frailty | Lognormal | Gamma | ||||
NB: Model with inverse Gaussian frailty distribution did not converge
NB: AIC = Akakian Information Criteria, BIC = Bayesian Information Criteria, LLR = Loglikelihood Ratio, NA = Not Applicable