Statalist


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

Re: st: Treatment for Missing Values - What Options ?


From   Maarten buis <maartenbuis@yahoo.co.uk>
To   statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu
Subject   Re: st: Treatment for Missing Values - What Options ?
Date   Fri, 17 Jul 2009 15:42:01 +0000 (GMT)

--- On Wed, 15/7/09, Chao Yawo wrote:
> Given that close to 60% of those who are "Missing" on the
> condom use variable are not sexually active, I decided to 
> condition / subset the check I did earlier for the
> relationship between the dependent variable and the Missing
> variable on only those who are Sexually Active, and got a
> different result from what I sent out yesterday:
<snip>
> Thus, if we take sexual activity only into consideration,
> the results are non-significant.  

That is good news.

I see two approaches here:
1) If your dependent variable only makese sense when the 
respondent is sexually active, you should restrict the sample 
to those sexually active individuals. After that you can 
safely ignore the missing cases, as these are no longer 
related to your outcome variable

2) If your dependent variable does make sense when the 
respondent is not sexually active, than you can use the dummy 
variable approach for those cases that where not sexually 
active. The remaining missing values can than be safely ignored. 

Hope this helps,
Maarten

-----------------------------------------
Maarten L. Buis
Institut fuer Soziologie
Universitaet Tuebingen
Wilhelmstrasse 36
72074 Tuebingen
Germany

http://home.fsw.vu.nl/m.buis/
-----------------------------------------


      

*
*   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/



© Copyright 1996–2014 StataCorp LP   |   Terms of use   |   Privacy   |   Contact us   |   What's new   |   Site index