Hi All,
I don't know a right topic for my question. Hope it reaches many of you.
I have been in the forum asking on counting process survival analysis.
I have made some progress on it. Thanks for the help!
I posted one question on merging variables which have different time interval (T1,T2). I guess it is tricky for everyone.
So I split time (start, stop) of one variable into interval (T1, T2) that can be matched with other variables.
Below in table1 is the original one with treatment, start and stop, and outcome.
And I split start and stop time in table 2 (T1,T2) so I can merge it with other variables.
I hope that the result will be similar, but it is not: HR using table 1 is slightly larger than that from table 2.
I really appreciate if any could have explanations and how to adjust it?
Thank you!
Hao
Table 1
ID | start | stop | outcome | treatment |
1 | 0 | 0.0001 | 0 | 0 |
1 | 0.0001 | 2.218 | 0 | 1 |
2 | 0 | 0.0001 | 0 | 0 |
2 | 0.0001 | 2.779 | 0 | 1 |
3 | 0 | 2.105 | 0 | 0 |
4 | 0 | 5.092 | 0 | 0 |
4 | 5.092 | 6.47 | 0 | 1 |
5 | 0 | 3.532 | 0 | 0 |
5 | 3.532 | 6.494 | 0 | 1 |
6 | 0 | 3.603 | 0 | 0 |
Table 2
ID | start | stop | outcome | treatment | T1 | T2 |
1 | 0 | 0.0001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
1 | 0.0001 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
1 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
1 | 2 | 2.218 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 2.218 |
2 | 0 | 0.0001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
2 | 0.0001 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
2 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
2 | 2 | 2.779 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 2.779 |
3 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
3 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
3 | 2 | 2.105 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2.105 |
4 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
4 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
4 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 3 |
4 | 3 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 4 |
4 | 4 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 5 |
4 | 5 | 5.092 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 6 |
4 | 5.092 | 6 | 0 | 1 | 5 | 6 |
4 | 6 | 6.47 | 0 | 1 | 6 | 6.47 |
5 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
5 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
5 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 3 |
5 | 3 | 3.532 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 4 |
5 | 3.532 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 4 |
5 | 4 | 5 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 5 |
5 | 5 | 6 | 0 | 1 | 5 | 6 |
5 | 6 | 6.494 | 0 | 1 | 6 | 6.494 |
6 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
6 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
6 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 3 |
6 | 3 | 3.603 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 4 |
6 | 3.603 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 4 |
6 | 4 | 5 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 5 |
6 | 5 | 6 | 0 | 1 | 5 | 6 |
6 | 6 | 6.47 | 0 | 1 | 6 | 6.47 |
Hello @haoduonge ,
I see your question already has been answered successfully on the 'Statistical Procedures' board.
Great!
Maybe a good idea to mark this thread as solved as well, such that people don't lose time opening and reading it.
Thanks,
Koen
Not sure why you have put this in the 'SAS Text and Content Analytics' board.
'Statistical Procedures' board looks more relevant to me.
Anyway, you say:
> I hope that the result will be similar, but it is not: HR using table 1 is slightly larger than that from table 2.
What is HR? Hazards Regression, Human Resources? 😉
And what survival analysis model / procedure are you using? PROC PHREG?
Can you show us pieces of the output where you indicate the differences and why you think they shouldn't be there?
Thanks,
Koen
Koen,
I reposted it under 'Statistical procedures' as your suggestion and added more information on it.
Thanks!
Hao
Hello @haoduonge ,
I see your question already has been answered successfully on the 'Statistical Procedures' board.
Great!
Maybe a good idea to mark this thread as solved as well, such that people don't lose time opening and reading it.
Thanks,
Koen
Good news: We've extended SAS Hackathon registration until Sept. 12, so you still have time to be part of our biggest event yet – our five-year anniversary!
Use this tutorial as a handy guide to weigh the pros and cons of these commonly used machine learning algorithms.
Find more tutorials on the SAS Users YouTube channel.