19APR2010 PN=majminor

The PHREG Procedure

Model Information
Data Set	WORK.TEMP
Dependent Variable	fop_cvd
Censoring Variable	cvd
Censoring Value(s)	0
Ties Handling	BRESLOW

Number of Observations Read Number of Observations Used

902 902

Class Level Information
Class	Value	Design Variables
trt	1	1
	2	0
CLINIC	A	1	0	0
	B	0	1	0
	C	0	0	1
	D	0	0	0

Summary of the Number of Event and Censored Values
Total	Event	Censored	Percent Censored
902	112	790	87.58

Convergence Status
Convergence criterion (GCONV=1E-8) satisfied.

Model Fit Statistics
Criterion	Without Covariates	With Covariates
-2 LOG L	1497.918	1472.478
AIC	1497.918	1482.478
SBC	1497.918	1496.071

Testing Global Null Hypothesis: BETA=0
Test	Chi-Square	DF	Pr > ChiSq
Likelihood Ratio	25.4402	5	0.0001
Score	26.0098	5	<.0001
Wald	25.4287	5	0.0001

Type 3 Tests
Effect	DF	Wald Chi-Square	Pr > ChiSq
trt	1	4.2939	0.0382
CLINIC	3	8.6968	0.0336
AGE	1	13.4326	0.0002

Analysis of Maximum Likelihood Estimates
Parameter		DF	Parameter Estimate	Standard Error	Chi-Square	Pr > ChiSq	Hazard Ratio	Label
trt	1	1	-0.41369	0.19964	4.2939	0.0382	0.661	trt 1
CLINIC	A	1	0.62138	0.30570	4.1315	0.0421	1.861	CLINIC A
CLINIC	B	1	0.47621	0.30184	2.4891	0.1146	1.610	CLINIC B
CLINIC	C	1	-0.02561	0.31635	0.0066	0.9355	0.975	CLINIC C
AGE		1	0.05373	0.01466	13.4326	0.0002	1.055

Hazard Ratios for trt
Description	Point Estimate	95% Wald Confidence Limits
trt 1 vs 2	0.661	0.447	0.978

Hazard Ratios for CLINIC
Description	Point Estimate	95% Wald Confidence Limits
CLINIC A vs B	1.156	0.721	1.855
CLINIC A vs C	1.910	1.148	3.176
CLINIC A vs D	1.861	1.022	3.389
CLINIC B vs C	1.652	1.002	2.722
CLINIC B vs D	1.610	0.891	2.909
CLINIC C vs D	0.975	0.524	1.812

Hazard Ratios for AGE
Description	Point Estimate	95% Wald Confidence Limits
AGE Unit=10	1.711	1.284	2.281

19APR2010 PN=majminor

The PHREG Procedure

Model Information
Data Set	WORK.TEMP
Dependent Variable	fop_cvd
Censoring Variable	cvd
Censoring Value(s)	0
Ties Handling	BRESLOW

Number of Observations Read Number of Observations Used

902 902

Class Level Information
Class	Value	Design Variables
trt	1	1
	2	0
CLINIC	A	1	0	0
	B	0	1	0
	C	0	0	1
	D	0	0	0

Summary of the Number of Event and Censored Values
Total	Event	Censored	Percent Censored
902	112	790	87.58

Convergence Status
Convergence criterion (GCONV=1E-8) satisfied.

Model Fit Statistics
Criterion	Without Covariates	With Covariates
-2 LOG L	1497.918	1481.022
AIC	1497.918	1495.022
SBC	1497.918	1514.052

Testing Global Null Hypothesis: BETA=0
Test	Chi-Square	DF	Pr > ChiSq
Likelihood Ratio	16.8961	7	0.0181
Score	16.5453	7	0.0206
Wald	15.4747	7	0.0304

Type 3 Tests
Effect	DF	Wald Chi-Square	Pr > ChiSq
trt	1	7.7484	0.0054
CLINIC	3	1.9787	0.5768
trt*CLINIC	3	4.8145	0.1859

Analysis of Maximum Likelihood Estimates
Parameter			DF	Parameter Estimate	Standard Error	Chi-Square	Pr > ChiSq	Hazard Ratio	Label
trt	1		1	-1.40286	0.50397	7.7484	0.0054	.	trt 1
CLINIC	A		1	-0.25537	0.47142	0.2934	0.5880	.	CLINIC A
CLINIC	B		1	-0.26800	0.44955	0.3554	0.5511	.	CLINIC B
CLINIC	C		1	-0.65609	0.47142	1.9370	0.1640	.	CLINIC C
trt*CLINIC	1	A	1	1.34607	0.63780	4.4542	0.0348	.	trt 1 * CLINIC A
trt*CLINIC	1	B	1	1.12205	0.62041	3.2709	0.0705	.	trt 1 * CLINIC B
trt*CLINIC	1	C	1	1.00622	0.64858	2.4069	0.1208	.	trt 1 * CLINIC C

Hazard Ratios for trt
Description	Point Estimate	95% Wald Confidence Limits
trt 1 vs 2 At CLINIC=A	0.945	0.439	2.033
trt 1 vs 2 At CLINIC=B	0.755	0.372	1.535
trt 1 vs 2 At CLINIC=C	0.673	0.302	1.497
trt 1 vs 2 At CLINIC=D	0.246	0.092	0.660