| From | Richard Williams <[email protected]> |
| To | [email protected] |
| Subject | RE: st: RE: the impute command |
| Date | Wed, 19 May 2004 12:05:42 -0500 |
At 05:40 PM 5/19/2004 +0100, Nick Cox wrote:
It works in the case of the example I gave, where -logit- is used. The -round- function could potentially be problematic if you were using the -impute- command, because you could conceivably have an imputed value of, say, 1.51, which would get rounded to two. A more all-purpose recode would be. replace y = round(y) is an alternative to -recode- here.
The manual makes the claim that impute "is often much better than deleting cases with any missing data." I agree that that statement is very debatable. Paul Allison in his book "Missing Data" makes a pretty good argument that listwise deletion is often better than some of the traditional alternatives that have been used, including the sort of thing done by impute. He also discusses more advanced techniques that can be better.2. It is not at all clear that -impute- is overall a very good way of doing it.
I agree. I'd like to see Stata implement some of the more powerful methods that are out there. I'd also like to see a portion of the Users Guide devoted to discussion of ways of handling missing data.3. Various users have implemented some better ways to do it. 4. Official Stata's support for good ways of doing it is not that great, right now. Information on what StataCorp will add in the near future follows this colon: (no, sorry, it's missing; impute your own guess).
| © Copyright 1996–2024 StataCorp LLC | Terms of use | Privacy | Contact us | What's new | Site index |