Bookmark and Share

Notice: On April 23, 2014, Statalist moved from an email list to a forum, based at statalist.org.


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

AW: Re: st: remaining missings after multiple imputation


From   Anne Jurczok <[email protected]>
To   [email protected]
Subject   AW: Re: st: remaining missings after multiple imputation
Date   Tue, 20 Apr 2010 15:13:42 +0200

Hello,
First of all thank you for the advice with the if function in ice. I will certainly try it as well.

Do these observations contain only missing values on
the variables you use for the imputation?...

...I looked at my variables which have missings despite the imputation and found no coherent pattern. Do you have any idea?
Best, Anne

--- On Mon, 19/4/10, Anne Jurczok wrote:
I decided against using ice, since I have different types
of missings in my dataset (hard and soft missings) and I
couldn't find any literature about different types of
missings handled by ice.
It is implicit in the sense that -ice- allows you to specify
an -if- statement. So, you could type something like:

gen byte soft = lnvermgen < .a
ice <varlist> if soft, <other options>
Not all cases of my dataset are considered for the
imputation.
Do these observations contain only missing values on
the variables you use for the imputation?


-- 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/




*
*   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 1996–2018 StataCorp LLC   |   Terms of use   |   Privacy   |   Contact us   |   Site index