[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date index][Thread index]

From |
David Airey <david.airey@vanderbilt.edu> |

To |
statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu |

Subject |
re: st: ratios first or last? |

Date |
Sun, 23 Nov 2003 14:11:55 -0600 |

This is helpful, Michael. So, if I understand this correctly, for denominators that are skewed right, we should expect the ratio of averages to give a greater animal estimate than the average of ratios? I'll test this.

Thank you for these thoughts.

-Dave

The ratio of averages gives greater weight to observations with larger

values in the denominator than the average of the ratios. In fact, you can

get both estimates from weighted regressions:

ratio of averages:

reg y x [aw=1/x], nocons

average of ratios:

reg y x [aw=1/x^2], nocons

which allows you to see the implicit weighting of each approach. Each

estimator can be considered the "best" (BLUE) estimator for a given

assumption about the variance. The ratio of averages approach is commonly

referred to as a "ratio estimator" in survey sampling literature. In most

applications, the average of ratios approach is thought to be less

representative of the variance structure.

If you find that the ratio of averages is giving larger estimates, then the

indivdual ratios tend to be larger with larger values of x.

Michael Blasnik

michael.blasnik@verizon.net

----- Original Message -----

From: "David Airey" <david.airey@vanderbilt.edu>

To: <statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu>

Sent: Saturday, November 22, 2003 8:27 PM

Subject: st: ratios first or last?

> Recently I was surprised to find a difference between two methods of

> calculating a ratio during an experiment. Each animal has two measures

> taken repeatedly over time. The ratio is of the two measures. I could

> take the ratio at each time point, and then average the ratios to get

> my animal ratio. Alternatively, I could average each of the two

> measures and then form a ratio of the two averages, again getting my

> animal ratio. The second method consistently gets a higher ratio than

> the first method. Why would this occur? The second method is standard

> in my literature base.

>

> -Dave

>

>

* * For searches and help try: * http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/res/findit.html * http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/

**Follow-Ups**:**Re: st: ratios first or last?***From:*"Michael Blasnik" <michael.blasnik@verizon.net>

- Prev by Date:
**st: Suppressing Output in Estimation** - Next by Date:
**st: question regarding the past practice of survey data analysis** - Previous by thread:
**re: st: ratios first or last?** - Next by thread:
**Re: st: ratios first or last?** - Index(es):

© Copyright 1996–2016 StataCorp LP | Terms of use | Privacy | Contact us | What's new | Site index |