Statalist


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

Re: st: RE: Biomarker with lower detection limits


From   Maarten buis <maartenbuis@yahoo.co.uk>
To   statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu
Subject   Re: st: RE: Biomarker with lower detection limits
Date   Tue, 17 Nov 2009 18:24:49 +0000 (GMT)

--- On Tue, 17/11/09, Lachenbruch, Peter wrote:
> My inclination is NOT to use imputation - you already know
> these are below the detection limit, so why impute something
> larger than that?  

Alternatively, you could use multiple imputation, as long as
your imputation model respects this information you have 
about your variable. This is the kind of problem Patrick 
Royston seems to had in mind when writing this update to his 
-ice- command:

Patrick Royston (2007) Multiple imputation of missing values: 
further update of ice, with an emphasis on interval censoring.
The Stata Journal, 7(4):445-464.
http://www.stata-journal.com/article.html?article=st0067_3

Hope this helps,
Maarten

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

http://www.maartenbuis.nl
--------------------------


      

*
*   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