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

From |
Steven Joel Hirsch Samuels <sjhsamuels@earthlink.net> |

To |
statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu |

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

Date |
Tue, 25 Sep 2007 10:21:47 -0400 |

To estimate a SD see: http://www.stata.com/statalist/archive/2007-04/ msg00879.html

To estimate a CI for a SD see: http://www.stata.com/statalist/archive/ 2007-05/msg00941.html

Steve

On Sep 25, 2007, at 8:42 AM, Carter Rees wrote:

Ben,

In terms of "correct", I was thinking of first running my regression and

then using something along the lines of a -svy- command using the subpop

option and e(sample) to calculate the sd of my independent variables. One

could then compare this result with what -estadd- and -listcoef- computes.

However, I believe there was a post long ago that asked if -svy- could

indeed calculate sd's for variables and the answer was "not directly". I

have yet to find the actual post though.

I could use -svy- mean and e(sample) to check the means and then cross

reference this with the -estadd- summ option computes. This would give me

some idea of how the survey design is being taken into account.

I did some quick checking last night and -estout- and -listcoef- do indeed

compute different sd's for my variables. This is not to say they are

radically different but some are enough to make me wonder which to use.

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

realreason 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

briefsummary 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 tablesdisplaythe standardized factor change coefficients via the -estadd- ebsdoption.

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

designwhen calculating the sd of the independent variables while - estadd- ebsd

maynot. If this is the case, how can I include the standardized factorchangecoef'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/

Steven Samuels sjhsamuels@earthlink.net 18 Cantine's Island Saugerties, NY 12477 Phone: 845-246-0774 EFax: 208-498-7441 * * 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>

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

- Prev by Date:
**RE: st: -estout- and ebsd** - Next by Date:
**st: Checking matrix column names** - Previous by thread:
**RE: st: -estout- and ebsd** - Next by thread:
**RE: st: -estout- and ebsd** - Index(es):

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