I have a very basic question regarding modelling when testing for interaction for finding heterogeneity in treatment effects in subgroups.
As far as I understand the general specification of the model where a single single subgroup is considered will be
Treat+Subgroup+Subgroup x Treat
However when analysing multiple subgroups what would be the correct way to specify the model
Treat+Subgroup1+Subgroup2+Subgroup1 x Treat
or
Treat+Subgroup1+Subgroup2+Subgroup1 x Treat+Subgroup2 x Treat
Thinking about HTE in terms of subgroups is a recipe for disaster as it invites dichotomization of continuous predictor variables.
For analyzing multiple interacting variables get composite (âchunkâ) tests pooling all interaction terms that involve treatment. Best done with a likelihood ratio \chi^2 if using frequentist methods. This chunk test has a perfect multiplicity adjustment and is not harmed by collinearities among interacting factors. You can also do this with a Wald test (automatic if using the R rms
packge).
1 Like
Thank you. So, in this case, the model specification for cph will be like this
Treat+Subgroup1+Subgroup2+Treat x Subgroup1 + Treat x Subgroup 2 ?
Donât use âsubgroupâ.
General example:
f <- cph(Surv(dtime,event) ~ treat * (sex + rcs(age,4) + ethnicity) + rcs(blood.pressure,3))
anova(f)
2 Likes
Thank you once again. But another question.
Why is treat not also added as a term in the model ? I mean why is the model not specified as
Is
treat+sex+rcs(age,4)+ethinicity+treat x sex+treat x rcs(age,4)+treat x ethnicity
the same as
treat x (sex + rcs(age,4) + ethnicity) ?
In R, * means to include main effects automatically. To only include cross-product terms you must use :
but rms
doesnât like that.
1 Like
Thank you. This cleared the matter a lot.