← Back to home
Comparison · Analytics

CRediTas vs ggsurvfit

A side-by-side editorial comparison of CRediTas and ggsurvfit — release velocity, themes, recent moves, and the top alternatives to consider.

CRediTas vs ggsurvfit: at a glance

FeatureCRediTasggsurvfit
SectorAnalyticsAnalytics
Velocity score0.02.5
Sparks · 30d00
Top themesropensci, r-package, credit-taxonomy, academic-publishingsurvival-analysis, ggplot2, competing-risks, clinical-plots
Last editorial update52m ago1h ago
WebsiteVisit →Visit →

What is CRediTas?

A CRediT author-statement generator that renamed itself, then went quiet for two years.

CRediTas turns a contributor-roles table into a CRediT Author Statement for a paper. The 0.2.0 release in April 2023 did the heavy lifting — package rename, a full object_verb() API rename, and output that drops straight into R Markdown or Quarto. The 0.3.0 release in August 2025 is the only activity since and carries no changelog text beyond a pointer to NEWS.md.

Read the full CRediTas trajectory →

What is ggsurvfit?

ggsurvfit is in correctness-and-compatibility mode, not feature mode.

The package draws survival and cumulative-incidence curves on a ggplot2 grammar, with risk tables, p-values and quantile annotations. Recent releases are entirely fixes and upstream tracking: ggplot2 v4.0.0 compatibility in 2025, and a 2026 patch correcting a Gray-test p-value that could be reported for the wrong competing event.

Read the full ggsurvfit trajectory →

CRediTas vs ggsurvfit: editorial side-by-side

C
CRediTas
ANALYTICS
0.0

A CRediT author-statement generator that renamed itself, then went quiet for two years.

◆ Current state

CRediTas turns a contributor-roles table into a CRediT Author Statement for a paper. The 0.2.0 release in April 2023 did the heavy lifting — package rename, a full object_verb() API rename, and output that drops straight into R Markdown or Quarto. The 0.3.0 release in August 2025 is the only activity since and carries no changelog text beyond a pointer to NEWS.md.

◆ Where it's heading

Development front-loaded a breaking cleanup during rOpenSci review and has coasted since. The design bet made in 0.2.0 — return a string for inline use rather than write a file — pointed the package at literate authoring workflows rather than at standalone scripts, and nothing since has moved away from it. The empty 0.3.0 note makes the current direction impossible to read from the feed.

◆ Prediction

Too little is published to call the next move; the 0.3.0 entry would need to carry its actual changes for the trajectory to be readable from the changelog at all.

G
ggsurvfit
ANALYTICS
2.5

ggsurvfit is in correctness-and-compatibility mode, not feature mode.

◆ Current state

The package draws survival and cumulative-incidence curves on a ggplot2 grammar, with risk tables, p-values and quantile annotations. Recent releases are entirely fixes and upstream tracking: ggplot2 v4.0.0 compatibility in 2025, and a 2026 patch correcting a Gray-test p-value that could be reported for the wrong competing event.

◆ Where it's heading

The feature surface settled around 1.0.0, when risk-table alignment was exported and colour and linetype defaults became configurable. Since then the work is keeping pace with survival, ggplot2 and tidycmprsk changes, and closing cases where the plotted curve and the annotation disagreed — the p-value matched by position rather than name, confidence limits swapped for multi-state models, quantiles read off a plateau.

◆ Prediction

Expect the next release to track upstream survival or ggplot2 changes rather than add plotting features; the CDISC censoring convention adopted in Surv_CNSR() suggests further alignment with clinical data standards is the likelier direction.

Alternatives to CRediTas and ggsurvfit

Other Analytics products tracked by Sparkpulse, ranked by recent ship velocity. Each card links to a full editorial trajectory and lets you pivot into a head-to-head comparison with either CRediTas or ggsurvfit.

See all CRediTas alternatives → · See all ggsurvfit alternatives →

Recent activity from CRediTas and ggsurvfit

Latest ship moves from both products, interleaved chronologically. ⚡ = editorial spark.

  1. 20d agoggsurvfitGray-test p-values matched to the plotted outcome by name
  2. 10mo agoggsurvfitggplot2 v4.0.0 compatibility and multi-state CI label fix
  3. 11mo agoCRediTasVersion 0.3.0
  4. 2y agoggsurvfitNegative follow-up times and a cloglog transformation
  5. 2y agoggsurvfitAesthetic defaults become switchable and alignment is exported
  6. 2y agoggsurvfitConfidence limits corrected for monotonicity-reversing transforms
  7. 3y agoCRediTasZenodo release (version 0.2.0)
  8. 3y agoCRediTasPackage and every function renamed; output goes inline
  9. 3y agoggsurvfitGlue syntax in risk tables and coxph model support

Frequently asked questions

What is the difference between CRediTas and ggsurvfit?

They serve adjacent needs but don't currently overlap on shipped themes. ggsurvfit is currently shipping more aggressively (velocity 2.5 vs 0.0), with 0 editorial sparks in the last 30 days against 0. See the at-a-glance table above for a side-by-side breakdown of velocity, recent sparks, and editorial themes.

Is CRediTas better than ggsurvfit?

Sparkpulse doesn't pick a winner — we score release velocity, not feature parity. ggsurvfit is currently shipping more aggressively (velocity 2.5 vs 0.0), with 0 editorial sparks in the last 30 days against 0. For your specific use case, the alternatives sections above list other Analytics products to evaluate alongside.

What are the best alternatives to CRediTas?

Top CRediTas alternatives in Analytics are ranked by recent ship velocity. Browse the "CRediTas alternatives" section above for the current picks, or visit /alternatives/creditas for the full list with editorial commentary on each.

What are the best alternatives to ggsurvfit?

Top ggsurvfit alternatives in Analytics are ranked by recent ship velocity. Browse the "ggsurvfit alternatives" section above for the current picks, or visit /alternatives/ggsurvfit for the full list with editorial commentary on each.