I think Austin indirectly raises an interesting
although tricky question of principle here. As a program
author I am happy to mention other people's programs
(a) when I am aware of them and (b) when they
are complementary to mine. And I imagine that attitude
attracts widespread agreement.
But I'm queasier about getting into an
evaluation of other people's programs.
More prosaically, I just don't see that as a usual
expectation what belongs in a help file.
It can reasonably be included in a write-up of a program
in a normal academic manner, as "fair comment"
on the alternatives.
Naturally, I don't want to lay down the law about
practices and a help file can be used for various
useful purposes. I just want to flag that the issue
is a little delicate.
Nick
[email protected]
Austin Nichols
> Also, I for one would much appreciate a comparison of the various
> user-written packages for meta-analysis included in the help file, as
> a supplement to "Also see" section at the bottom of the help file.
*
* 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/
