Risk-adjusted frailty-based CUSUM control chart for phase I monitoring of patients’ lifetime

References

• Lawless JF. Statistical models and methods for lifetime data. New York: Wiley; 2003.
   Google Scholar
• Olteanu DA. Cumulative sum control charts for censored reliability data [Dissertation]. Virginia (USA): Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University; 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Huang X, Pascual F. ARL-unbiased control charts with alarm and warning lines for monitoring Weibull percentiles using the first-order statistic. J Stat Comput Simul. 2011;81(11):1677–1696.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guo B, Wang B. Control charts for monitoring the Weibull shape parameter based on type-II censored sample. Qual Reliab Eng Int. 2014;30(1):13–24.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Akhundjanov SB, Pascual F. Moving range EWMA control charts for monitoring the Weibull shape parameter. J Stat Comput Simul. 2015;85(9):1864–1882.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haghighi F, Pascual F, Castagliola P. Conditional control charts for Weibull quantiles under type II censoring. Qual Reliab Eng Int. 2015;31(8):1649–1664.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yang SF, Zhou R, Lu SW. A median loss control chart for monitoring quality loss under skewed distributions. J Stat Comput Simul. 2017;87(17):3241–3260.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Raza SMM, Ali S, Butt MM. DEWMA control charts for censored data using Rayleigh lifetimes. Qual Reliab Eng Int. 2018;34(8):1675–1684.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang FK, Bizuneh B, Cheng XB. New control charts for monitoring the Weibull percentiles under complete data and type-II censoring. Qual Reliab Eng Int. 2018;34(3):403–416.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xu S, Jeske DR. Weighted EWMA charts for monitoring type-1 censored Weibull lifetimes. J Qual Technol. 2018;50(2):220–230.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Panza CA, Vargas JA. Monitoring Weibull regression models with type I right-censored observations in phase II processes. Commun Stat Simul Comput. 2020;49(2):1–22.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mehmood R, Lee MH, Afzel A, et al. Generalized skewness correction structure of control chart for unknown process parameters and skewed probability distributions. J Stat Comput Simul. 2020;90(8):1–24.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Panza CA, Vargas JA. Monitoring the parameter vector of regression models with time-to-event response in phase II processes. J Stat Comput Simul. 2017;87(14):2779–2798.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Knoth S, Wittenberg P, Gan FF. Risk-adjusted CUSUM charts under model error. Stat Med. 2019;38(12):2206–2218.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sego LH, Reynolds MR, Woodall WH. Risk-adjusted monitoring of survival times. Stat Med. 2009;28(9):1386–1401.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gandy A, Kvaloy JT, Bottle A, et al. Risk-adjusted monitoring of time to event. Biometrika. 2010;97(2):375–388.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang L, Gan FF, Loke CK. Phase I study of surgical performance with risk adjusted Shewhart control charts. Qual Technol Quant Manag. 2012;9(4):375–382.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sun RJ, Kalbfleisch JD. A risk-adjusted O-E CUSUM with monitoring bands for monitoring medical outcomes. Biometrics. 2013;69(1):62–69.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mohammadian F, Niaki STA, Amiri A. Phase-I risk-adjusted geometric control charts to monitor health-care systems. Qual Reliab Eng Int. 2014;32(1):19–28.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Khosravi R, Owlia MS, Fallahnezhad MS, et al. Phase I risk-adjusted control charts for surgical data with ordinal outcomes. Commun Stat Theor M. 2018;47(18):4422–4432.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li J, Jiang J, Jiang X, et al. Risk-adjusted monitoring of surgical performance. PLoS One. 2018;13(8):e0200915.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tighkhorshid E, Amiri A, Amirkhani F. A risk-adjusted EWMA chart with dynamic probability control limits for monitoring survival time. Commun Stat Simul Comput. 2019 [online].
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sachlas A, Bersimis S, Psarakis S. Risk-adjusted control charts: theory, methods, and applications in health. Stat Biosci. 2019;11(3):630–658.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Asadzadeh S, Baghaei A. Robust AFT-based monitoring procedures for reliability data. Qual Technol Quant Manag. 2020;17(1):1–15.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gan FF, Yuen JS, Knoth S. Quicker detection risk-adjusted cumulative sum charting procedures. Stat Med. 2020;39(7):875–889.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paynabar K, Jin J, Yeh BA. Phase I risk-adjusted control charts for monitoring surgical performance by considering categorical covariates. J Qual Technol. 2012;44(1):39–53.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Asadayoobi N, Niaki STA. Monitoring patient survival times in surgical systems using a risk-adjusted AFT regression chart. Qual Technol Quant Manag. 2017;14(2):237–248.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Asadzadeh S, Aghaei A, Niaki STA. AFT regression-adjusted monitoring of reliability data in cascade processes. Qual Quant. 2013;47(6):3349–3362.
   Google Scholar
• Asadzadeh S, Aghaei A, Shahriari H, et al. The application of proportional hazards and frailty models to multistage processes surveillance. Int J Adv Manuf Tech. 2014;74(1-4):461–470.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Steiner SH, Cook RJ, Farewell VT, et al. Monitoring surgical performance using risk-adjusted cumulative sum charts. Biostatistics. 2000;1(4):441–452.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hanagal DD. Modeling survival data using frailty models. Boca Raton (FL): Taylor and Francis Group; 2011.
   Google Scholar
• Hanagal DD, Pandey A. Gamma frailty models for bivariate survival data. J Stat Comput Simul. 2015;85(15):3172–3189.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar