Stata The Stata listserver
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date index][Thread index]

RE: st: plot predicted effects after regression


From   Fred Wolfe <fwolfe@arthritis-research.org>
To   statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu
Subject   RE: st: plot predicted effects after regression
Date   Sat, 08 May 2004 15:54:44 -0500

matter on Statalist before now, so it's not clear
how often this is needed.

I need it all the time! I just

-gen byte dummy = 1 at the top of a do file

-then adjust, by(dummy)

Fred

At 02:11 PM 5/8/2004, you wrote:
This is a question for StataCorp, so I
have to guess at an answer. I doubt that
there is a strong programming objection to what you
suggest. Rather, the aim of -adjust-
is to tabulate sets of predictions, and
what you suggest would make the default
output somewhat trivial. In other words,
it looks like a design issue, not a syntax one.

The first and last time I wanted predictions
as function of one covariate, all others
being set to their means, it irritated
me that you had to talk your way past
that -by()- requirement. So I wrote a wrapper
that does it for me, but hesitated at
making that public, given the labour of writing
the help and a worry that it might not be
general enough to bear the weight some users
might put on it. That was January 2003,
and I don't recall anyone raising the
matter on Statalist before now, so it's not clear
how often this is needed.

Nick
n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu
> [mailto:owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu]On Behalf Of Richard
> Williams
> Sent: 08 May 2004 19:54
> To: statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu; statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu
> Subject: RE: st: plot predicted effects after regression
>
>
> At 06:58 PM 5/8/2004 +0100, Nick Cox wrote:
> >You can use -adjust-: you just need to talk
> >your way past the requirement for a -by()-
> >option (unless that is part of what you want).
>
> As a sidelight, I've never liked or understood the requirement that
> -adjust- include the -by- parameter; why not just default to
> analyzing all
> cases at once instead of requiring that calculations be done for
> subgroups?  It can be worked around, but it is a minor
> nuisance so why
> require it in the first place?  If dropping the -by-
> requirement would
> create some sort of compatibility problem, perhaps some sort
> of optional
> parameter to analyze all selected cases could be added instead.

*
*   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/

Fred Wolfe
National Data Bank for Rheumatic Diseases
Wichita, Kansas
Tel (316) 263-2125     Fax (316) 263-0761
fwolfe@arthritis-research.org


*
*   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/



© Copyright 1996–2014 StataCorp LP   |   Terms of use   |   Privacy   |   Contact us   |   What's new   |   Site index