Bookmark and Share

Notice: On March 31, it was announced that Statalist is moving from an email list to a forum. The old list will shut down on April 23, and its replacement, statalist.org is already up and running.


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

st: estimation after multiple imputation: difference between regular estimation and post-imputation estimation


From   Mandy fu <mandy.fu1@gmail.com>
To   statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu
Subject   st: estimation after multiple imputation: difference between regular estimation and post-imputation estimation
Date   Thu, 11 Mar 2010 09:43:36 -0500

Hello everyone,

I was wondering if anyone could give some hint what causes the
differences of using regular estimation and post-multiple imputation
estimation.
Let me use an example. After multiple imputation, I know I should use
--mim: xtmixed----- instead of simply --xtmixed--- to conduct the
growth curve analysis. But I am not very clear about the reason. Could
anyone give some help here?

Additionally, based on previous discussion in statalist , using
----mim:xtmixed--- is very tricky to get the model level
characteristics, such as log likelihood. If I would like to compare
the fit-goodness of several models , does it make sense to use the
log-likelihood for the models from using ---xtmixed--on the imputed
data sets as an approximate?

Thanks for your time!

Best regards,
Mandy
*
*   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   |   Site index