The Wise son:
Oh, how I love to talk about Cox Proportional Hazard (PH) regression versus Logistic Regression. So, you see, it depends on the study endpoint. Does the outcome depend on the duration of follow-up time? Logistic regression ignores the time to event all together. But everyone knows that the longer you follow someone, the higher the chance he/she will develop the outcome. Cox PH offers a regression framework to model the factors' effects on time to event while logistic regression will just model factors' effect on the event rate.
The Simple son:
Well, just remember that this is all about follow-up bias. You can use logistic regression as long as your outcome occurs instantaneously, or when all study participants have the same follow-up time. KIS - Just keep it simple.
The Wicked son:
And what about the proportionality assumption, that hazard ratio remains constant over time? One can test the assumption with R code:
cox.zph(model.coxph0)
With this code you will get the proportionality test for each variable in the model. Small p values indicate that proportionality assumption is violated. Oh, how I love to talk about violations.
The Simple son:
So what to do if the proportionality is rejected for a specific factor in the model?
The Wicked son:
Ha Ha! I knew you would ask this. For now it is beyond the scope of this cute little post. However, stratifying on the non-proportional factor may offer some remedy. That is to say, that the hazard rate is estimated within in each stratum for all the other covariates.
He who couldn't ask:
Guys, with Cox PH I’m in regression. What exactly Cox meant with the hazard parameter. At first I thought I understood what you're talking about, but now I’m helpless. When I feel like this, I make myself a healthy salad, with a bit of tahini on top, and it takes my worries go away.