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

From |
David Sabapathy <David.Sabapathy@albertahealthservices.ca> |

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

Subject |
st: RE: RE: RE: RE: Nested loops by observation |

Date |
Mon, 20 Jul 2009 15:18:35 -0600 |

Thank you for your assistance, both Nick's solution and reshape; up and running with both now (for my own learning) David Sabapathy ________________________________________ From: owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu [owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu] On Behalf Of Nick Cox [n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk] Sent: July 20, 2009 12:12 PM To: statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu Subject: st: RE: RE: RE: Nested loops by observation That's very clear. As earlier suggested, you are in general better off with a -reshape- for this kind of data, but in this particular case, the problem is highly tractable row-wise. egen dgc = concat(dgc_?_1b_cde) gen byte chronic = strpos(dgc,"011") > 0 So, you just push all the zeros and ones into a string variable and look for the substring "011". This could made a one-liner, with some loss of clarity. Either way, no loops, no nesting. Nick n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk David Sabapathy Thank you very much for your reply. You are correct in that I am figuring out how Stata works relative to some other software I used eons ago. I also have a gut instinct this is not the way to go. A sample of my dataset is as follows: Obs dgc1_1b_cde dgc2_1b_cde dgc3_1b_cde dgc4_1b_cde dgc5_1b_cde dgc6_1b_cde dhc1_age dhc2_age dhc3_age ..... dhc6_age chronic 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 20 22 24 30 . 2 0 1 0 1 0 1 66 68 70 76 . 3 0 0 0 0 1 1 34 36 38 44 . 4 1 1 0 1 0 1 42 44 46 52 . ... N>15000 Each observation represents one individual's responses to a medication survey administered 6 consecutive times or cycles. The "dgc" variables represent a binary response to whether this individual is taking a certain medication (1=yes). The fourth character in the "dgc" variables e.g. dgc"1" represents the cycle number. e.g. the first individual did not take the medication in cycle 5 (dgc5_1b_cde==0) but did in cycle 6 (dgc6_1b_cde==0). I am defining incident chronic usage of this medication as the patient not taking the medication in any cycle i followed by taking the medication for two consecutive cycles i+1 and i+2. That is you need a sequence of three cycles starting with a "0" and followed by two "1s". Above, observations 1 and 3 qualify as being chronic incident usage of the medication, 2 and 4 do not. The "dhc" variables in my code are just the individuals age. I thought of setting the "chronic" variable if the incidient chronic usage condition was met but it ce! rtainly looks like a new approach is needed. David Sabapathy ________________________________________ From: owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu [owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu] On Behalf Of Nick Cox [n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk] Sent: July 20, 2009 10:59 AM To: statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu Subject: st: RE: Nested loops by observation My visceral instinct, fortified by some Stata experience, is that this is not the way to go at all. That is, I guess that your second sentence is quite wrong: you don't need to do it this way at all. This looks like the code of someone experienced in some alternative software, but less so in Stata. In Stata, loops over observations are rarely needed given the scope for using -by:- and _n. Give an example of your data and a precise definition of chronic condition and I will try to advise further. (I'm not going to try to infer your definition from your code.) Nick n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk David Sabapathy I have a question related to the FAQ "if command versus if qualifier". For each observation in a dataset I need to perform a series of nested loops ("forvalues" / "if") on a longitudinal variable set to evaluate whether a "chronic" medication condition exists. That is, each observation contains multiple years of survey information (the dgc* variables below) which is being analyzed and if a chronic condition exists a new variable "chronic" is set to 1. I can't use the nested commands as shown below in a simplified version of the code as they only work on the first observation. However I also can't use this nested code as a qualifier (i.e. replace chronic = 1 if ...) as syntax does not appear to allow this type of nesting. Is there anyway I can step through observations one by one with this nested code? Any other possible solutions? Thank you for any help you can provide, David gen chronic = . forvalues cycle = 1(1)4 { if dgc`cycle'_1b_cde == 0 { // if no med use cycle i local chron_cyc1 = `cycle' + 1 if dgc`chron_cyc1'_1b_cde == 1 { // if med use cycle_i+1 local chron_cyc2 = `cycle' + 2 if dgc`chron_cyc2'_1b_cde == 1 { // if med use cycle_i+2 if dhc`chron_cyc1'_age >=65 & dhc`chron_cyc2'_age >=65 { // "replace chronic = 2" } else { // "replace chronic = 1" } } } } } * * 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/ This message and any attached documents are only for the use of the intended recipient(s), are confidential and may contain privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, retransmission, or other disclosure is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately, and then delete the original message. Thank you. * * 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/

**References**:**st: Nested loops by observation***From:*David Sabapathy <David.Sabapathy@albertahealthservices.ca>

**st: RE: Nested loops by observation***From:*"Nick Cox" <n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk>

**st: RE: RE: Nested loops by observation***From:*David Sabapathy <David.Sabapathy@albertahealthservices.ca>

**st: RE: RE: RE: Nested loops by observation***From:*"Nick Cox" <n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk>

- Prev by Date:
**Re: st: multiple weights per person in GEE?** - Next by Date:
**Re: st: DHS sampling weight command** - Previous by thread:
**st: RE: RE: RE: Nested loops by observation** - Next by thread:
**st: AW: RE: RE: Nested loops by observation** - Index(es):

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