similar to: stepwise algorithm step() on coxph() (PR#1159)

Hello R-Users,   I have one binary dependent variable and a set of independent variables (glm(formula,…,family=”binomial”) ) and I am using the function stepAIC (“MASS”) for choosing an optimal model. However I am not sure if stepAIC considers significance properties like Likelihood ratio test and Wald test (see example below).     > y <- rbinom(30,1,0.4) > x1 <- rnorm(30) > x2

Dear all, I cannot seem to get the R functions step or stepAIC to perform forward or stepwise regression as I expect. I have enclosed the example data in a dataframe at the end of this mail. Note rubbish is and rnorm(17) variable which I have deliberately added to the data to test the stepwise procedure. I have used wateruse.lm<-lm(waterusage~.,data=wateruse) # Fit full model

Hi, I am experiencing a baffling behaviour of stepAIC(), and I hope to get any advice/help on what went wrong or I'd missed. I greatly appreciate any advice given. I am using stepAIC() to, say, select a model via stepwise selection method. R Version : 1.7.1 Windows ME Many thanks and best regards, Siew-Leng ***Issue : When stepAIC() is placed within a function, it seems

Hello, My question concerns model selection, stepAIC(), add1(), and coxph(). In Venables and Ripley (3rd Ed) pp389-390 there is an example of using stepAIC() for the automated selection of a coxph model for VA lung cancer data. A statistics question: Can partial likelihoods be interpreted in the same manner as likelihoods with respect to information based criterion and likelihood ratio tests?

Full_Name: John E. Kolassa Version: Version 1.8.1 OS: Solaris Submission from: (NULL) (128.6.76.36) Stepwise model selection for coxph appears to fail with method="exact". The code step(coxph(Surv(1:100,rep(1,100))~factor(rep(1:4,25)),method="exact")) produces the error message Start: AIC= 733.07 Surv(1:100, rep(1, 100)) ~ factor(rep(1:4, 25)) Error in

Dear R users, I noticed a problem in the anova command when applied on a single coxph object if there are missing observations in the data: This example code was run on R-2.6.1: > library(survival) > data(colon) > colondeath = colon[colon$etype==2, ] > m = coxph(Surv(time, status) ~ rx + sex + age + perfor, data=colondeath) > m Call: coxph(formula = Surv(time, status) ~ rx +

SImplify your call to lm using the "." argument instead of manipulating formulas. > strt <- lm(y1 ~ ., data = dat) and you do not need to explicitly specify the "1+" on the rhs for lm, so > frm2<-as.formula(paste(trg," ~ ", paste(xvars,collapse = "+"))) works fine, too. Anyway, doing this gives (but see end of output)" bst <-

Dear all, I tried to use "step" function to do model selection, but I got an error massage. What I don't understand is that data as data.frame worked well for my other programs, how come I cannot make it run this time. Could you please tell me how I can fix it? ***************************************************************************************************

Hello, I would like to compare two different models in the framework of Cox proportional hazards regression models. On Rsitesearch and google I don't find a clear answer to my question. My R-Code (R version 2.9.0) coxph.fit0 <- coxph(y ~ z2_ + cluster(as.factor(keys))+ strata(stratvar_), method="breslow" ,robust=T ) coxph.fit1 <- coxph(y ~ z_ +

Dear R user, I got a question when using the coxph function. I have 5 covariates x1, x2, x3, x4, x5 and I want to write a function so that when given an indicator, e.g., c(1,3,5), I can fit the model as model=coxph(Surv(time, status)~x1+x3+x5). Any idea to play around the form of formula? Thank you very much! Xing Yuan University of Pittsburgh [[alternative HTML version deleted]]

Dear all, I have encountered a problem when perform stepwise regression. The dataset have more 9 independent variables, but 7 observation. In R, before performing stepwise, a lm object should be given. fm <- lm(y ~ X1 + X2 + X3 + X11 + X22 + X33 + X12 + X13 + X23) However, summary(fm) will give: Residual standard error: NaN on 0 degrees of freedom Multiple R-Squared: 1, Adjusted

hello I built logistic regression model. To model check I used stepAIC. But I don't know how it is interpreted . I could not any find any explanation about it For instance which model is preferable ? What are the critarias to choose beter model I will appreciate if you give me an explanation ? models --------- > lo1.step$anova Stepwise Model Path Analysis of Deviance Table Initial

Failed? What was the error message? Cheers, Bert Bert Gunter "The trouble with having an open mind is that people keep coming along and sticking things into it." -- Opus (aka Berkeley Breathed in his "Bloom County" comic strip ) On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 8:17 AM, Stephen O'hagan <SOhagan at manchester.ac.uk> wrote: > I'm trying to use boot.stepAIC for

The error is "the model fit failed in 50 bootstrap samples Error: non-character argument" Cheers, SOH. On 22/08/2017 17:52, Bert Gunter wrote: > Failed? What was the error message? > > Cheers, > > Bert > > > Bert Gunter > > "The trouble with having an open mind is that people keep coming along > and sticking things into it." > -- Opus (aka

I'm attempting to select a model using stepAIC. I want to use a forward selection procedure. I have specified a "scope" option, but must not be understanding how this works. My results indicate that the procedure begins and ends with the "full" model (i.e., all 17 independent variables)...not what I expected. Could someone please point out what I'm not

Hello, I wonder when I do coxph in R: coxph( Surv(start, stop, event) ~ x, data=test) If x is a categorical varible (1,2,3,4,5), should I creat four dummy varibles for it? if yes, how can I get the overall p value on x other than for each dummy variable? Thanks Lisa Wang Princess Margaret Hospital Phone 416 946 4501

System: R 2.3.1 on Windows XP machine. I am building a logistic regression model for a sample of 100 cases in dataframe "d", in which there are 3 binary covariates: x1, x2 and x3. ---------------- > summary(d) y x1 x2 x3 0:54 0:50 0:64 0:78 1:46 1:50 1:36 1:22 > fit <- glm(y ~ x1 + x2 + x3, data=d, family=binomial(link=logit)) >

He, I used the "coxph" function, with four covariates. Let's say something like that > model.1 <- coxph(Surv(Time,Event)~X1+X2+X3+X4,data=DATA) So I obtain the 4 coefficients B1,B2,B3,B4 such that h(t) = h0(t) exp(B1*X1+ B2*X2 + B3*X3 + B4*X4). When I use the function on the same data > predict.coxph(model.1,type="lp") how it works in making the prediction?

Dear R-Help, I am trying to perform forward selection on the following coxph model: >my.bpfs <- Surv(bcox$pfsdays, bcox$pfscensor) > b.cox <- coxph(my.bpfs ~ Cbase + Abase + Cbave + CbSD + KPS + gender + as.factor(eor) + Age)>stepAIC(b.cox, scope=list(upper =~ Cbase + Abase + Cbave + CbSD + KPS + gender + as.factor(eor) + Age, lower=~1), direction= c("forward")) However

Dear Terry, Even the behaviour of lm() and glm() isn't entirely consistent. In both cases, singularity results in NA coefficients by default, and these are reported in the model summary and coefficient vector, but not in the coefficient covariance matrix: ---------------- > mod.lm <- lm(Employed ~ GNP + Population + I(GNP + Population), + data=longley) >