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

From |
"Carter Rees" <carterrees@gmail.com> |

To |
<statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu> |

Subject |
RE: st: -estout- and ebsd |

Date |
Tue, 25 Sep 2007 10:12:00 -0400 |

Ben, I believe that I have the issued worked out. Thanks for the help. Following the suggestions given in http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/stat/supweight.html I ran my model (svy, subpop(maleage): nbreg) and pulled the standard deviations of my independent variables using both the -estadd- and -listcoef- methods. As mentioned before they are not the same. From here I wanted to see if I could use the above mentioned FAQ to reproduce the -estadd- and -listcoef- sd's. summarize persfight [aw=gs] if maleage == 1 & e(sample) produced the same sd's as -estadd- with an n = 3353. summarize persfight [aw=gs] if e(sample) produced the same sd's as -listcoef- with an n = 8619. The difference (as you mentioned earlier) is in the use of the subpopulation. -listcoef- computes the sd's across all cases (in this instance males and females ages 12 to 18 yrs) which is not what I wanted here. -estadd- limits the calculation only to males in the appropriate age. Thanks again. Carter -----Original Message----- From: owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu [mailto:owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu] On Behalf Of Ben Jann Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2007 4:40 AM To: statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu Subject: Re: st: -estout- and ebsd Carter wrote: > Your response seems to indicate that my survey > design is correctly taken into account by -estadd- ebsd option (correct?). Well, I'm not sure. It takes into account the weights and the -subpop()- option, but -estadd ebsd- just uses plain -summarize- and no adjustment is made for degrees of freedom or so, which I assume would have to if there are strata and/or clusters. What would be the "correct" formula for the SD in this case? Is there a Stata command that computes it? ben On 9/25/07, Carter Rees <carterrees@gmail.com> wrote: > Ben, > > The command I am using is svy subpop(): nbreg, so yes the subpop option is > specified for my model. Your response seems to indicate that my survey > design is correctly taken into account by -estadd- ebsd option (correct?). > Thus, maybe -listcoef- isn't recognizing the survey design. (I had no real > reason to assume that -listcoef- was correct vs. -estadd-). I am going to > compare results between the two using your code below and will post a brief > summary of findings. > > Carter > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu > [mailto:owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu] On Behalf Of Ben Jann > Sent: Monday, September 24, 2007 3:30 PM > To: statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu > Subject: Re: st: -estout- and ebsd > > I don't know about -listcoef-, but -estadd ebsd- computes the sd using > -summarize- on the observations identified by e(sample) (and e(subpop) > if defined), and applying the appropriate weights. Did you use the > -subpop()- option in your models? This might explain the difference. > > If you want tabulate results from listcoef, then do something like the > following: > > . nbreg ... > . listcoef, matrix //-matrix- saves results in r(); type -return > list- for details > . matrix b_facts = r(b_facts) > . estadd matrix b_facts = b_facts > . estout ., cell(b b_facts) style(smcl) > > ben > > PS: A set of -estadd- commands to support the -spost- package is in > preparation. > > On 9/24/07, Carter Rees <carterrees@gmail.com> wrote: > > Statalist, > > > > Windows XP, Stata 10 SE. > > > > I am using svy: nbreg to run a series of regressions and then using > -estout- > > to format my regression tables. Instead of the raw b's my tables display > > the standardized factor change coefficients via the -estadd- ebsd option. > > > > All is well and good except the standardized factor change coefficients > > don't precisely match those displayed if I check them using -listcoef-, > > help. My assumption is that -listcoef- takes into account the survey > design > > when calculating the sd of the independent variables while -estadd- ebsd > may > > not. If this is the case, how can I include the standardized factor > change > > coef's as computed by -listcoef- in my -estout- generated table? > > > > Much appreciated. > > > > Carter > > > > > > * > > * 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/ > > > * > * 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/ > > * > * 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/ > * * 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/ * * 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/

**References**:**st: -estout- and ebsd***From:*"Carter Rees" <carterrees@gmail.com>

**Re: st: -estout- and ebsd***From:*"Ben Jann" <ben.jann@gmail.com>

**RE: st: -estout- and ebsd***From:*"Carter Rees" <carterrees@gmail.com>

**Re: st: -estout- and ebsd***From:*"Ben Jann" <ben.jann@gmail.com>

- Prev by Date:
**Re: st: clarification on interpreting Stock&Yogo- maximal IV "size"** - Next by Date:
**Re: st: -estout- and ebsd** - Previous by thread:
**RE: st: -estout- and ebsd** - Next by thread:
**st: Drawing 3 normally distributed variable with a given correlation structure to an existing variable** - Index(es):

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