similar to: backquotes and term.labels

Thanks to Bill Dunlap for the clarification. On follow-up it turns out that this will be an issue for many if not most of the routines in the survival package: a lot of them look at the terms structure and make use of the dimnames of attr(terms, 'factors'), which also keeps the unneeded backquotes. Others use the term.labels attribute. To dodge this I will need to create a

Ben, Looking at your notes, it appears that your solution is to write your own terms() function for lme.? It is easy to verify that the "varnames.fixed" attribute is not returned by the ususal terms function. Then I also need to write my own terms function for the survival and coxme pacakges? Because of the need to treat strata() terms in a special way I manipulate the formula/terms in

>>>>> Ben Bolker <bbolker at gmail.com> >>>>> on Thu, 8 Mar 2018 09:42:40 -0500 writes: > Meant to respond to this but forgot. > I didn't write a new terms() function -- I added an attribute to the > terms() (a vector of the names > of the constructed model matrix), thus preserving the information at > the point when

I believe this has to do terms() making "term.labels" (hence the dimnames of "factors") with deparse(), so that the backquotes are included for non-syntactic names. The backquotes are not in the column names of the input data.frame (nor model frame) so you get a mismatch when subscripting the data.frame or model.frame with elements of terms()$term.labels. I think you can

Meant to respond to this but forgot. I didn't write a new terms() function -- I added an attribute to the terms() (a vector of the names of the constructed model matrix), thus preserving the information at the point when it was available. I do agree that it would be preferable to have an upstream fix ... On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 9:39 AM, Therneau, Terry M., Ph.D. via R-devel <r-devel

ExpeRts, I'm trying to compare three survival curves using the function "survdiff" in the survival package. Following is my code and corresponding error message. > survdiff(Surv(st_months, status) ~ strata(BOR), data=mydata) Error in survdiff(Surv(st_months, status) ~ strata(BOR), data = mydata) : No groups to test When I check the "strata" of the variable. I get .

This is more of a general question without data. After doing 'survdiff', from the 'survival' package, on strata including four groups (so 4 curves on a Kaplan Meier curve) you get a chi squared p-value whether to reject the null hypothesis or not. Is there a method to followup with pairwise testing on the respective groups? I have searched the library but have come up with

R Folk: Please forgive what I'm sure is a fairly na?ve question; I hope it's clear. A colleague and I have been doing a really simple one-off survival analysis, but this is an area with which we are not very familiar, we just happen to have gathered some data that needs this type of analysis. We've done quite a bit of reading, but answers escape us, even though the question below

Dear Prof. Therneau I was impressed to discover that the 'survConcordance' now handles Surv() objects in counting format (example below to clarify what I mean). This is not documented in the help page for the function. I am very curious to see how a c-index is estimated in this case, using just the linear predictors. It was my impression that with left truncation the ordering of

Dear All, is there a stratified version of the Wilcoxon test (also known as van Elteren test) available in R? I could find it in the survdiff function of the survival package for censored data. I think, it should be possible to use this function creating a dummy censoring indicator and setting it to not censored, but may be there is a better way to perform the test. Thanks, Heinz T??chler

How can I get the Log - Rank p value to be output? The chi square value can be output, so I was thinking if I can also have the degrees of freedom output I could generate the p value, but can't see how to find df either. > (survtest <- survdiff(Surv(time, cens) ~ group, data = surv,rho=0)) Call: survdiff(formula = Surv(time, cens) ~ group, data = surv, rho = 0) N Observed

Hi, I have a data frame: > class(B27.vec) [1] "data.frame" > head(B27.vec) AGE Gend B27 AgeOn DD uveitis psoriasis IBD CD UC InI BASDAI BASFI Smok UV 1 57 1 1 19 38 2 1 1 1 1 1 5.40 8.08 NA 1 2 35 1 1 33 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1.69 2.28 NA 1 3 49 2 1 40 9 1 1 1 1 1 1 8.30 9.40 NA

That's more or less right. We wrote a terms.merMod method, which accesses the terms component of the @frame slot, which we have modified upstream ... Do you mean term.labels rather than term.names? BTW ?terms.object says (under the "term.labels" element): Non-syntactic names will be quoted by backticks: this makes it easier to re-construct the formula from the term

The number of recent questions from umn.edu makes me wonder if there's homework involved.... Simpler for your example is to use get and subset. dat <- structure(..... as found below var.to.test <- names(dat)[4:6] #variables of interest nvar <- length(var.to.test) chisq <- double(nvar) for (i in 1:nvar) { tfit <- survdiff(Surv(time, completion==2) ~

I read through Harrington and Fleming (1982) but it is beyond my statistical comprehension. I have survival data for insects that have a very finite expiration date. I'm trying to test for differences in survival distributions between different groups. I understand that the medical field is most often dealing with censored data and that survival analysis, at least in the package survival,

I recently had a long argument wrt the survival package, namely that the following code didn't do what they expected, and so they reported it as a bug ? survival::coxph( survival::Surv(time, status) ~ age + sex + survival::strata(inst), data=lung) a. The Google R style guide? recommends that one put :: everywhere b. This breaks the recognition of cluster as a "special" in the

Hi I have a problem with this error, I have searched the archives and found previous discussion about this, can I cannot understand how the explanations apply to what I am trying to do. I am trying to do Log_rank Survival analysis, I have included tables and str command, is it a factor/integer problem? If so how do I correct this, as all my attempt to recode the data have failed. >

I?m trying to set up proportional hazard model that is stratified with respect to covariate 1 and has an interaction between covariate 1 and another variable, covariate 2. Both variables are categorical. In the following, I try to illustrate the two problems that I?ve encountered, using the lung dataset. The first problem is the warning: To me, it seems that there are too many dummies

Hi everyone!! I have dataset composed of a numbers of survival analyses. ( for batch survival analyses by using for-loop) . Here are code !! ####### dim(svsv) Num_t<-dim(svsv) Num<-Num_t[2] # These are predictors !! names=colnames(svsv) for (i in 1:Num ) { name_tt=names[i] survdiff(Surv(survival.m, survival) ~ names[i], data=svsv) fit.Group<-survfit(Surv(survival.m, survival) ~

> On Feb 13, 2018, at 4:02 PM, array chip via R-help <r-help at r-project.org> wrote: > > Hi all, > > The survdiff() from survival package has an argument "rho" that implements Fleming-Harrington weighted long rank test. > > But according to several sources including "survminer" package