Analyze time-to-PhD-completion data for 500 doctoral students. Help me: 1) Prepare data in person-period format, 2) Estimate Kaplan-Meier curves by field of study, 3) Run Cox proportional hazards model with predictors (funding, advisor support, publications), 4) Test proportional hazards assumption, 5) Interpret hazard ratios, 6) Create survival curves. Use R.
Here's a guide to analyzing time-to-PhD-completion data for 500 doctoral students in R, covering your specified tasks step by step.
Assuming you have a dataset in the form of a data frame named phd_data that includes the following columns:
student_id: Unique identifier for each studenttimetocompletion: Time (in years) until completion or censoringevent: Censoring indicator (1 if the student completed the PhD, 0 otherwise)field_study: Field of study (e.g., "STEM", "Humanities", "Social Sciences")funding: Funding status (e.g., "Full", "Partial", "None")advisor_support: Level of advisor support (e.g., "High", "Medium", "Low")publications: Number of publications during PhD
1. Prepare data in person-period format
First, ensure your data is structured properly. If you need to pivot the data into person-period format, here’s how you can do it. However, since typical analysis with survival data does not need person-period format, we will skip this step.
2. Estimate Kaplan-Meier curves by field of study
You can use the
survival package to create Kaplan-Meier curves. Here’s how:library(survival)
library(ggplot2)# Create a survival object
surv_obj <- Surv(time = phd_data$time_to_completion, event = phd_data$event)
# Fit Kaplan-Meier survival curves
km_fit <- survfit(surv_obj ~ field_study, data = phd_data)
# Plot the Kaplan-Meier curves
ggsurvplot(km_fit, data = phd_data,
risk.table = TRUE,
pval = TRUE,
conf.int = TRUE,
xlab = "Time to Completion (years)",
ylab = "Survival Probability",
title = "Kaplan-Meier Curves by Field of Study")
3. Run Cox proportional hazards model with predictors
Using the
coxph function, you can fit a Cox proportional hazards model including the predictors of interest.# Convert categorical variables to factors
phd_data$field_study <- as.factor(phd_data$field_study)
phd_data$funding <- as.factor(phd_data$funding)
phd_data$advisor_support <- as.factor(phd_data$advisor_support)# Fit Cox proportional hazards model
cox_model <- coxph(surv_obj ~ funding + advisor_support + publications + field_study, data = phd_data)
summary(cox_model)
4. Test proportional hazards assumption
To test the proportional hazards assumption, you can use the
cox.zph function from the survival package.# Test proportional hazards assumption
test_ph <- cox.zph(cox_model)
print(test_ph)
plot(test_ph)5. Interpret hazard ratios
The hazard ratios can be extracted from the summary of the Cox model. The
exp(coef(model)) will give you the hazard ratios.# Get hazard ratios
hazard_ratios <- exp(coef(cox_model))
conf_intervals <- exp(confint(cox_model))# Combine hazard ratios and confidence intervals in a data frame
hr_df <- data.frame(
Variable = names(hazard_ratios),
Hazard_Ratio = hazard_ratios,
CI_Lower = conf_intervals[, 1],
CI_Upper = conf_intervals[, 2]
)
print(hr_df)
6. Create survival curves
You can create survival curves based on the fitted Cox model by specifying different levels of the predictors.
# Example of creating survival curves for different funding levels
new_data <- data.frame(funding = factor(c("Full", "Partial", "None"), levels = levels(phd_data$funding)),
advisor_support = "High", # Example fixed level for other predictors
publications = mean(phd_data$publications)) # Average number of publications
surv_fit_new <- survfit(cox_model, newdata = new_data)# Plot the new survival curves
ggsurvplot(surv_fit_new, data = phd_data,
xlab = "Time to Completion (years)",
ylab = "Survival Probability",
title = "Survival Curves by Funding Status")
Conclusion
This guide provides a general procedure for analyzing time-to-PhD-completion data using R. Each step contains the essential code needed for survival analysis including estimating Kaplan-Meier curves, fitting the Cox model, testing assumptions, and plotting survival curves. Be sure to tailor the variable names and factors according to your actual dataset.
Complete Survival Analysis for PhD Completion Data in R
I'll provide a comprehensive analysis of PhD completion times using survival analysis methods.
```r
Load required libraries
library(survival)
library(survminer)
library(ggplot2)
library(dplyr)
library(tidyr)
library(broom)
library(gridExtra)
Set seed for reproducibility
set.seed(123)
============================================================================
1. GENERATE AND PREPARE DATA IN PERSON-PERIOD FORMAT
============================================================================
Generate simulated PhD completion data
n_students <- 500
Create baseline dataset
phd_data <- data.frame(
studentid = 1:nstudents,
field = sample(c("STEM", "Social Sciences", "Humanities"),
n_students, replace = TRUE, prob = c(0.4, 0.35, 0.25)),
funding = sample(c("Full", "Partial", "None"),
n_students, replace = TRUE, prob = c(0.5, 0.3, 0.2)),
advisorsupport = rnorm(nstudents, mean = 7, sd = 2), # 1-10 scale
publications = rpois(n_students, lambda = 2),
gender = sample(c("Male", "Female"), n_students, replace = TRUE),
ageentry = round(rnorm(nstudents, mean = 26, sd = 3))
)
Clip advisor support to 1-10 range
phddata$advisorsupport <- pmax(1, pmin(10, phddata$advisorsupport))
Generate time-to-completion based on covariates
More publications, better funding, and advisor support reduce completion time
phddata$timetocompletion <- with(phddata, {
base_time <- 6 # Base 6 years
# Field effects
field_effect <- ifelse(field == "STEM", -0.5,
ifelse(field == "Social Sciences", 0, 0.8))
# Funding effects
funding_effect <- ifelse(funding == "Full", -0.8,
ifelse(funding == "Partial", 0, 1.2))
# Advisor support effect (negative = faster)
advisoreffect <- -0.15 * (advisorsupport - 7)
# Publications effect (negative = faster)
pub_effect <- -0.2 * publications
# Random variation
randomeffect <- rnorm(nstudents, 0, 1)
# Calculate time (ensure positive)
time <- basetime + fieldeffect + funding_effect +
advisoreffect + pubeffect + random_effect
pmax(2, pmin(12, time)) # Constrain between 2 and 12 years
})
Generate censoring (about 20% censored)
phddata$completed <- rbinom(nstudents, 1, 0.8)
For censored cases, observation time is less than completion time
phddata$timeobserved <- ifelse(phd_data$completed == 1,
phddata$timeto_completion,
phddata$timetocompletion * runif(nstudents, 0.5, 0.9))
Round times to one decimal
phddata$timeobserved <- round(phddata$timeobserved, 1)
Create person-period format
createpersonperiod <- function(data) {
person_period <- data %>%
rowwise() %>%
do({
df <- .
years <- ceiling(df$time_observed)
data.frame(
studentid = rep(df$studentid, years),
period = 1:years,
field = df$field,
funding = df$funding,
advisorsupport = df$advisorsupport,
publications = df$publications,
gender = df$gender,
ageentry = df$ageentry,
event = c(rep(0, years -
💡 Try this comparison yourself:Compare AI models side-by-side on SNEOS
Analysis
This comparison demonstrates the different approaches each AI model takes when responding to the same prompt. Here are the key differences observed:
Response Characteristics
ChatGPT: Provides a detailed response with 34 sentences.
Claude: Provides a detailed response with 21 sentences.
Key Takeaways
- Each model brings unique strengths to this type of query
- Response styles vary significantly between models
- Consider your specific use case when choosing between these models
Try This Comparison Yourself
Want to test these models with your own prompts? Visit SNEOS.com to compare AI responses side-by-side in real-time.
This comparison was generated using the SNEOS AI Comparison ToolPublished: October 15, 2025 | Models: ChatGPT, Claude