mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Pitfalls of Administrative Censoring in Survival Models with Time-Indexed Inputs

arXiv 2607.10466 ↗First posted 11 Jul 2026cs.LG stat.APcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Survival models can model time-to-event outcomes using partially observed data. They are widely used in clinical prediction, including cancer risk, disease progression, treatment response, and mortality. Recent models often rely on rich inputs collected at a specific clinical encounter, such as medical images, laboratory tests, electronic health record snapshots, or sensor measurements. In large retrospective datasets, these inputs are usually collected over many calendar years. As a result, they may contain clues about when they were acquired through changes in devices, protocols, documentation, patient mix, or clinical practice. This creates a potential failure mode when outcomes are observed only up to a fixed study end date. More recent records necessarily have less potential follow-up than older records. A model that can infer the record date from the input may therefore learn to predict how much follow-up was available rather than the patient's true risk of experiencing the event. We call this failure mode administrative-cutoff leakage. In this paper, we characterize when this leakage can occur, distinguish it from classical informative censoring and genuine temporal changes in risk, and propose practical ways to detect it. In simulations, we show that administrative-cutoff leakage can inflate fixed-horizon AUC and can also affect Harrell's C-index under realistic follow-up patterns. We then demonstrate the same behavior in a real mammography cohort. These results motivate a simple design principle for survival prediction: for an n-year prediction task, the dataset should provide at least n years of potential follow-up after the latest input date. Otherwise, the models may be subject to bias induced by administrative-cutoff leakage.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 11 of its 32 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 11 Jul 2026.

Builds on

11 of 32 references.

References · 11

  1. 2020Shortcut Learning in Deep Neural Networkscited by 1,969
  2. 2018Mitigating Unwanted Biases with Adversarial Learningcited by 663
  3. 2018Confounding variables can degrade generalization performance of radiological deep learning modelscited by 379
  4. 2016DeepSurv: Personalized Treatment Recommender System Using A Cox Proportional Hazards Deep Neural Networkcited by 358
  5. 2021Reading Race: AI Recognises Patient's Racial Identity In Medical Imagescited by 156
  6. 2018A Scalable Discrete-Time Survival Model for Neural Networkscited by 72
  7. 2019Continuous and Discrete-Time Survival Prediction with Neural Networkscited by 70
  8. 2018Deep Learning Predicts Hip Fracture using Confounding Patient and Healthcare Variablescited by 50
  9. 2024Mammo-CLIP: A Vision Language Foundation Model to Enhance Data Efficiency and Robustness in Mammographycited by 38
  10. 2020Deep Learning Applied to Chest X-Rays: Exploiting and Preventing Shortcutscited by 29
  11. 2023Large-Scale Study of Temporal Shift in Health Insurance Claimscited by 3

Built on by

Not cited yet.