similar to: Survreg function for loglogistic hazard estimation

I am trying to use R to do loglogistic hazard estimation. My plan is to generate a loglogistic hazard sample data and then use survreg to estimate it. If everything is correct, survreg should return the parameters I have used to generate the sample data. I have written the following code to do a time invariant hazard estimation. The output of summary(modloglog) shows the factor loading of

Hi, I'm estimating a loglogistic aft (accelerated failure time) model, just a simple plain vanilla one (without time dependent covariates), I'm comparing the results that I obtain between aftreg (eha package) and survreg(surv package). If I don't use any covariate the results are identical , if I add covariates all the coefficients are the same until a precision of 10^4 or 10^-5 except

1. The weibull is the only distribution that can be written in both a proportional hazazrds for and an accelerated failure time form. Survreg uses the latter. In an ACF model, we model the time to failure. Positive coefficients are good (longer time to death). In a PH model, we model the death rate. Positive coefficients are bad (higher death rate). You are not the first to be confused

Thanks for sharing the questions and responses! Is it possible to appreciate how much the coefficients matter in one or the other model? Say, using Biau's example, using coxph, as.factor(grade2 == "high")TRUE gives hazard ratio 1.27 (rounded). As clinician I can grasp this HR as 27% relative increase. I can relate with other published results. With survreg the Weibull model gives a

Dear R help list, I am modeling some survival data with coxph and survreg (dist='weibull') using package survival. I have 2 problems: 1) I do not understand how to interpret the regression coefficients in the survreg output and it is not clear, for me, from ?survreg.objects how to. Here is an example of the codes that points out my problem: - data is stc1 - the factor is dichotomous

R users, I am making model selection with an accelerated failure time model using the command survreg within the library survival. As I want to compare models with different probability distributions I need to have the full likelihood. How can I find out what survreg generates: the full likelihood or a likelihood with "unnecessary" constants dropped? Example I want to

Dear all, I am trying to find a suitable R-function for parametric proportional hazard regressions. The package survival contains the coxph() function which performs a Cox regression which leaves the base hazard unspecified, i.e. it is a semi-parametric method. The package Design contains the function pphsm() which is good for parametric proportional hazard regressions when the underlying base

Dear all, What is the cumulative distribution (with parameterization) used within survreg with respect to the log-logistic distribution? That is, how are the parameters linked to the survivor function? Best regards, Mario [[alternative HTML version deleted]]

Hi all, I am trying to run Weibull PH model in R. Assume in the data set I have x1 a continuous variable and x2 a categorical variable with two classes (0= sick and 1= healthy). I fit the model in the following way. Test=survreg(Surv(time,cens)~ x1+x2,dist="weibull") My questions are 1. Is it Weibull PH model or Weibull AFT model? Call: survreg(formula = Surv(time, delta) ~ x1

Hey all, I am trying to use the survreg function in R to estimate the mean and standard deviation to come up with the MLE of alpha and lambda for the weibull distribution. I am doing the following: times<-c(10,13,18,19,23,30,36,38,54,56,59,75,93,97,104,107,107,107) censor<-c(1,0,0,1,0,1,1,0,0,0,1,1,1,1,0,1,0,0) survreg(Surv(times,censor),dist='weibull') and I get the following

Greetings -- I would like to estimate a proportional hazard model with a weibull or lognormal baseline. I have looked at both the coxph() and survreg() functions and neither appear (to me ) to do it. Am I missing something in the docs or is there another terrific package out there that will do this. Many Thanks. Carl Mason

Hi, Is it normal to get intercept in the list of covariates in the output of survreg function with standard error, z, p.value etc? Does it mean that intercept was fitted with the covariates? Does Value column represent coefficients or some thing else? Regards, ------------------------------------------------- tmp = survreg(Surv(futime, fustat) ~ ecog.ps + rx, ovarian,

Hi, I would like to fit parametric survival models to time-to-event data that are left truncated. I have checked the help page for survreg and looked in the R-help archive, and it appears that the R function survreg from the survival library (version 2.16) should allow me to take account of left truncation. However, when I try the command

Dear r-help subscribers, A couple of weeks ago I sent the following message to the r-help mail list. It hasn't generated any response, and I could really use some help on this. Anyone able to help? Thanks again, Roger Dungan >> I am working on some survival analysis of some interval censored failure time data in R. I have done similar analysis before using PROC LIFEREG in SAS. In

Hi everybody. I'm trying to fit a weibull survival model with a spline basis for the predictor, using the survival library. I've noticed that it doesn't seem to be possible to use the aic method to choose the degrees of freedom for the spline basis in a parametric regression (although it's fine with the cox model, or if the degrees of freedom are specified directly by the user),

Dear r-help subscribers, I am working on some survival analysis of some interval censored failure time data in R. I have done similar analysis before using PROC LIFEREG in SAS. In that instance, a gamma survival function was the optimum parametric model for describing the survival and hazard functions. I would like to be able to use a gamma function in R, but apparently the survival package does

Hello, I'm working with some left censored survival data using accelerated failure time models. I am interested in fitting different distributions to the data but seem to be getting the same results from the model fit using survreg regardless of the assumed distribution. These two codes seem to provide the same results: aft.gaussian <-

Full_Name: Andrew Manners Version: 2.5.1 OS: windows xp prof 2003 Submission from: (NULL) (130.102.0.177) To whom it may concern, I'm trying to get an ANOVA table within survreg but it always produces NA's in the p-value, regardless of the data set. The data set below comes from Tableman and Kim 2004. I had the same problem on a number of my own data sets. I searched the R site for

---------------------------- Original Message ---------------------------- Subject: Different results from survreg with version 2.6.1 and 2.10.1 From: nathalcs at ulrik.uio.no Date: Fri, March 19, 2010 16:00 To: r-help at r-project.org -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear all I'm using survreg command in package survival.

Dear R Helpers, I am trying to carry out survival analysis in the presence of long term survivors (immunes/cureds). This involves using a split population model (some call it a mixture model) where the assumption of eventual failure is relaxed. I am following closely the formulation by Maller and Zhou (1996). Parametric modelling in this situation involves the introduction of a new