Would anyone be able to clarify the following three questions about the methods Stata uses to calculate confidence intervals for the survivor function with respect to the sts list command?
The main sts manual (https://www.stata.com/manuals/ststs.pdf) states on page 17 that while the standard error for survivor functions is calculated using Greenwood's formula, the confidence intervals are calculated using the ln[−ln S(t)] approach:
The standard error reported is given by Greenwood’s formula (Greenwood 1926) ... These standard errors, however, are not used for confidence intervals. Instead, the asymptotic variance of ln[−ln S(t)] ... is used.
The reason I am asking for clarification is that the manual specific to sts list (https://www.stata.com/manuals/ststslist.pdf) states on page 3 that the level option for sts list,
specifies the confidence level, as a percentage, for the Greenwood pointwise confidence interval of the survivor or failure function
2. What could be causing the difference in survivor function & confidence interval availability between sts list and sts list, risktable()?
3. Could you explain how I should interpret a missing survivor function result that is within the extent of my data and displays a confidence interval in my Kaplan-Meier graph and sts list, but cannot be assigned a confidence interval according to sts list, risktable()?
I greatly appreciate your time and assistance with this,
Andrew
Code:
sts list, risktable(6 12 24)
Code:
sts list, at(6 12 24)
Code:
sts graph, ci risktable risktable(0(6)24)
0 Response to Clarification on Methods used for 95% CI Calculation in sts list Commands
Post a Comment