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

From |
Austin Nichols <austinnichols@gmail.com> |

To |
statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu |

Subject |
Re: st: RE: regression assumption question |

Date |
Tue, 10 Mar 2009 13:01:46 -0400 |

moleps islon: I tend to agree with Tony <Peter.Lachenbruch@oregonstate.edu>, but note that if you believe that X affects the change in Y (dY = Ypost - Ypre) but Y is measured with error pre and post, you may prefer not to regress Ypost on Ypre and X, but rather to regress dY on X. Since Ypre is measured with error, its coef may be biased toward zero and you may be able to reject the null that its coef is one even when that is the true model, and you may also have bias in other coefs when you include Ypre, esp if treatment levels are correlated with true baseline Y levels. mat c=(1,0,0,0\ 0,1,0,0.5\ 0,0,1,0\ 0,0.5,0,1) drawnorm e1 y0 e0 x, n(1000) corr(c) seed(1) clear g ypost=y0+x/2+e1 g ypre=y0+e0 g dy=ypost-ypre reg ypost ypre x, nohe r reg dy x, nohe r But of course if Ypre does not have a coef of one in the true model, you will introduce bias by imposing that constraint in a regression of dY on X. Nearest-neighbor matching (findit nnmatch) on pre-treatment observables is another way forward here... On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 3:58 PM, Lachenbruch, Peter <Peter.Lachenbruch@oregonstate.edu> wrote: > My preference is to use the preop measure as a covariate. If you use > the change, you are essentially forcing the preop to have a coefficient > of 1. Sometimes people use the preop as a covariate for the change > score - this automatically induces a fairly high correlation with preop > - if you're not careful, you can believe it. > > Tony > > Peter A. Lachenbruch > Department of Public Health > Oregon State University > Corvallis, OR 97330 > Phone: 541-737-3832 > FAX: 541-737-4001 > > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu > [mailto:owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu] On Behalf Of moleps islon > Sent: Monday, March 09, 2009 11:49 AM > To: statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu > Subject: st: regression assumption question > > Dear listers, > I've got data on 300 patients preop and postop using the VAS scale > (ordinal scale). I'm trying to locate factors predicting improvement > postop. However there are several questions pertaining to this that > I'm unsure of. 1)Do I violate the assumption of independence? I assume > there would be some correlation between preop and postop within the > patients. 2)Would you recommend using delta (preop-postop) as the > dependent variable or postop alone? The analyses so far show some > heteroscedasticity-in case i violate the independence assumption- is > it possible to do add both vce(robust) and vce(cluster id) ? > > regards > Moleps > * > * For searches and help try: > * http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search > * http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq > * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/ > > * > * For searches and help try: > * http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search > * http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq > * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/ > * * For searches and help try: * http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search * http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/

**Follow-Ups**:**Re: st: RE: regression assumption question***From:*Steven Samuels <sjhsamuels@earthlink.net>

**References**:**st: regression assumption question***From:*moleps islon <moleps2@gmail.com>

**st: RE: regression assumption question***From:*"Lachenbruch, Peter" <Peter.Lachenbruch@oregonstate.edu>

- Prev by Date:
**AW: st: AW: implementation of variance formula** - Next by Date:
**st: Cant work from do-file** - Previous by thread:
**st: RE: regression assumption question** - Next by thread:
**Re: st: RE: regression assumption question** - Index(es):

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