similar to: cluster() or frailty() in coxph

Dear R-users, I have noticed small discrepencies in the reported estimate of the variance of the frailty by the print method for survreg() and the 'theta' component included in the object fit: # Examples in R-2.6.2 for Windows library(survival) # version 2.34-1 (2008-03-31) # discrepancy fit1 <- survreg(Surv(time, status) ~ rx + frailty(litter), rats) fit1 fit1$history[[1]]$theta

I would like to plot a survival curves of a group with different categories after running a Cox model with frailty() random effects terms. I just could display a survival plot of the covariable?s mean. Here an example: library(survival) fit<-coxph(Surv(time, status) ~ sex+ frailty(litter, dist='gamma', method='em'), rats) summary(fit ) suf<-survfit(fit) plot(suf,

Dear R users: I'm generating the following survival data: set.seed(123) n=200 #sample size x=rbinom(n,size=1,prob=.5) #binomial treatment v=rgamma(n,shape=1,scale=1) #gamma frailty w=rweibull(n,shape=1,scale=1) #Weibull deviates b=-log(2) #treatment's slope t=exp( -x*b -log(v) + log(w) ) #failure times c=rep(1,n) #uncensored indicator id=seq(1:n) #individual frailty indicator

Dear List, In documents (Therneau, 2003 : On mixed-effect cox models, ...), as far as I came to know, coxme penalize the partial likelihood (Ripatti, Palmgren, 2000) where as frailtyPenal (in frailtypack package) uses the penalized the full likelihood approach (Rondeau et al, 2003). How, then, coxme and coxph(...frailty(id, dist='gauss')) differs? Just the coding algorithm, or in

Does someone know the rules by which 'coxph' returns 'frail', the predicted frailty terms? In my test function: ----------------------------------------------- fr <- function(){ #testing(frailty terms in 'survival' require(survival) dat <- data.frame(exit = 1:6, event = rep(1, 6), x = rep(c(0, 1), 3),

Hi: I have a few clarification questions about the elements returned by the coxph function used in conjuction with a frailty term. I create the following group variable: group <- NULL group[id<50] <- 1 group[id>=50 & id<100] <- 2 group[id>=100 & id<150] <- 3 group[id>=150 & id<200] <- 4 group[id>=200 & id<250] <- 5 group[id>=250

Hello, I am working on the frailty model using coxph functions. I am running some simulations and want to store the variance of frailty (theta) values from each simulation result. Can anyone help me how to extract the theta values from the results. I appreciate any help. Thanks Shankar Viswanathan

Hi, I have a question about the output for variance of random effect from a gamma frailty model using coxph in R. Is it the vairance of frailties themselves or variance of log frailties? Thanks. Guanghui

Dear all, I have a data set<http://yaap.it/paste/c11b9fdcfd68d02b#gIVtLrrme3MaiQd9hHy1zcTjRq7VsVQ8eAZ2fol1lUc=>with 6 clusters, each containing 48 (possibly censored, in which case "event = 0") survival times. The "x" column contains a binary explanatory variable. I try to describe that data with a gamma frailty model as follows: library(survival) mod <-

Dear all, this is probably a very silly question, but could anyone tell me what the different parameters in a coxph model with a frailty.gamma term mean? Specifically I have two questions: (1) Compared to a "normal" coxph model, it seems that I obtain two standard errors [se(coef) and se2]. What is the difference between those? (2) Again compared to a "normal" coxph model,

Dear List, How do I extract the approximate Wald test for the frailty (in the following example 17.89 value)? What about the P-values, other Chisq, DF, se(coef) and se2? How can they be extracted? ######################################################> kfitm1 Call: coxph(formula = Surv(time, status) ~ age + sex + disease + frailty(id, dist = "gauss"), data = kidney)

Hi all. Belove is the example from the cluster-help page wtih the output. I simply cannot figure out how to relate the estimate and robust Std. Err to the p-value. I am aware this a marginal model applying the sandwich estimator using (here I guess) an emperical (unstructered/exchangeable?) ICC. Shouldent it be, at least to some extend, comparable to the robust z-test, for rx :

Hi: I have a question about the use of the survfit function after the estimation of a cox proportional hazard model with a frailty term. My goal is to estimate expected survival probabilities while controlling for the group-specific frailty term. First, I estimate a model of the following form: model1 <- coxph(Surv(t0, t, d) ~ x1 + x2 + frailty(id), na.action=na.exclude,

Dear list, I want o fit a shared gamma frailty model with the frailty specification in the survival package. I have partly left-truncated data and time-dependent covariates. Is it possible to combine these two things in the frailty function. Or are the results wrong if I use data in the start-stop-formulation which account for delayed entry? Is the frailty distribution updated in the

Hello, I was hoping that someone could answer a few questions for me (the background is given below): 1) Can the coxph accept an interaction between a covariate and a frailty term 2) If so, is it possible to a) test the model in which the covariate and the frailty appear as main terms using the penalized likelihood (for gaussian/t frailties) b)augment model 1) by stratifying on the variable that

Dear R-help, I am trying to estimate a Cox model with nested effects, or better h(t,v,w)=v*w*h0(t)*exp(B'x) where h(t,v,w) is the individual hazard function w and v are both frailty terms (gamma or normal distributed) I have 12 clusters and for each one of them I would like to associate a realization of v, while w is a random effect for the whole population. At the population level

Dear all, Does the frailty.object$history[[1]]$theta returns the Variance of random effect? Why is the value different? Here is an example with kidney data: > library(survival) > data(kidney) > frailty.object<-coxph(Surv(time, status)~ age + sex + disease + frailty(id), kidney) > frailty.object Call: coxph(formula = Surv(time, status) ~ age + sex + disease + frailty(id), data

Hello, Why the correlation between the random effects is negative? library(coxme) rats1 <- coxme(Surv(time, status) ~ (1|litter), rats) random.effects(rats1)[[1]] #one value for each of the 50 litters print(rats1) rats2 <- lmekin(time ~ (1|litter), rats) fixed.effects(rats2) random.effects(rats2)[[1]] #one value for each of the 50 litters print(rats2)

Dear all, I have been doing some frailty calculations and been facing some difficulties. I can extract coefficients, value of theta and the following things library(survival) fit<-coxph(Surv(time,status)~covariate+frailty(group), data=simulated.data) fit$coef fit$history[[1]]$theta fit$history[[1]]$c.loglik fit$var fit$var2 from a frailty included coxph object: but how can i know what other

Dear R members, I am new in using frailty models in survival analyses and am getting some contrasting results when I compare the Wald and likelihood ratio tests provided by the r output. I am testing the survivorship of different sunflower interspecific crosses using cytoplasm (Cyt), Pollen and the interaction Cyt*Pollen as fixed effects, and sub-block as a random effect. I stratified