This last brought forth a good chuckle. Perhaps combine them into a single
entry?
On a serious note, to have someone of significant experience say that they hadn't heard of
SAS's method for doing "x", for nearly any x, marks a welcome climate change. (And took
nearly that long.)
The phreg procedure also added a "Scheffe test" of the overall hypothesis, by the way,
which no one here has yet back-engineered to figure out what they are doing. An F-test?
Terry T.
On 01/20/2014 04:18 PM, peter dalgaard wrote:
On 20 Jan 2014, at 23:05 , Göran Broström <goran.brost...@umu.se> wrote:
On 01/20/2014 07:02 PM, peter dalgaard wrote:
On 20 Jan 2014, at 18:47 , Terry Therneau <thern...@mayo.edu> wrote:
The short summary: I was suspicious before, now I know for certain
that it is misguided, and the phreg implementation of the idea is
worse.
A fortune candidate, if ever I saw one.
OK, but please state clearly that 'phreg' refers to a SAS procedure, not the
function with the same name in the R package 'eha' (I should have chosen
another name, had I ever heard of SAS).
That'll be the 2nd fortune candidate of this evening...
Göran
-pd
______________________________________________
R-help@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
