- Thread starter YaelEpi
- Start date

If you've identified that the proportional hazards assumption is not reasonably satisfied in your case, you shouldn't be testing these corrective interactions with time (with the possibility of removing them) because you already determined the time*covariate interaction is needed.

You can report both in a table to show how much estimated coefficients changed with and without the remedy for non-proportional hazards. If they are very similar, you may want to consider putting the full model with interactions in a supplemental document. The idea being that the easily interpreted model is in your main text, and you refer the reader to the supplemental document so they can verify how little the estimates and conclusions change in this case when the remedy is applied. However, I would opt for trying to include both, side by side, in the main manuscript if space allows.

It may look like this:

A

B

T

A*T

B*T

**with a foot note explaining how to properly calculate the hazard ratio at time T for group A relative to the baseline group.

Just a thought, some other people may have different ideas, though.

If you've identified that the proportional hazards assumption is not reasonably satisfied in your case, you shouldn't be testing these corrective interactions with time (with the possibility of removing them) because you already determined the time*covariate interaction is needed.

You can report both in a table to show how much estimated coefficients changed with and without the remedy for non-proportional hazards. If they are very similar, you may want to consider putting the full model with interactions in a supplemental document. The idea being that the easily interpreted model is in your main text, and you refer the reader to the supplemental document so they can verify how little the estimates and conclusions change in this case when the remedy is applied. However, I would opt for trying to include both, side by side, in the main manuscript if space allows.

It may look like this:

A

B

T

A*T

B*T

**with a foot note explaining how to properly calculate the hazard ratio at time T for group A relative to the baseline group.

Just a thought, some other people may have different ideas, though.

Let me see if I understood it correctly, you are saying that if the original covariate’s coefficients did not changed dramatically between the models (with and without the adjustment for the interaction with time) I should report them in the main manuscript?

Does the coefficients of the interaction with time (as a continuous variable) has any importance or it is just the method for correcting the original covariate’s coefficients?

Ondansetron, Thank you very much for your answer!

Let me see if I understood it correctly, you are saying that if the original covariate’s coefficients did not changed dramatically between the models (with and without the adjustment for the interaction with time) I should report them in the main manuscript?

Let me see if I understood it correctly, you are saying that if the original covariate’s coefficients did not changed dramatically between the models (with and without the adjustment for the interaction with time) I should report them in the main manuscript?

Does the coefficients of the interaction with time (as a continuous variable) has any importance or it is just the method for correcting the original covariate’s coefficients?