[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: st: Interpretation of regressionmodel of ln-transformed variable

From   "Nick Cox" <>
To   <>
Subject   RE: st: Interpretation of regressionmodel of ln-transformed variable
Date   Wed, 5 Nov 2008 19:26:05 -0000

I doubt that anything is wrong with Tony's model except that
-eform("exp(b)")- should just be -eform-.


roland andersson

Peter and Maarten

I am sorry Peter. Your model is not accepted by Stata. I tried
different alternativ without success.

However I tried Maarten GLM model

xi: glm studytime i.drug c_age cons, family(gaussian) link(log) nocons

on my data and got a different result compared to the regress of the
lnLOS. Now laparoscopy has shorter LOS. Which method is correct?

2008/11/5 Lachenbruch, Peter <>:

> The issue seems to be that hospitals have a closure date on stay when
> you are doing a study after patients are certain (or almost certain)
> have been discharged (e.g., all records are from admissions at least a
> year old).
> An alternative model might fit the reciprocal of the mean rather than
> the log of the observations (thus obviating problems with 0 days of
> - e.g. an outpatient visit to the ER)  in this case you could use
> generalized linear models to get
> xi: glm LOS  lapscopic i.appdgn age agesq cons, eform("exp(b)")
> link(power -1) nocons
> Tony

*   For searches and help try:

© Copyright 1996–2015 StataCorp LP   |   Terms of use   |   Privacy   |   Contact us   |   What's new   |   Site index