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, is already up and running.

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

Re: st: Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2011 16:20:17 -0400

From   Daniel Marcelino <>
Subject   Re: st: Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2011 16:20:17 -0400
Date   Thu, 7 Apr 2011 18:59:15 -0300

maybe I misunderstood part of your inquire. However, some words can
help you think more specific about your outcome.
First, yes you should interpret your coefficient as you do in a linear
regression. Regard that the main difference between both techniques is
the shrinkage and liability aspects, not the coefficient or slope
Second, as I understood from your question a more accurate model of
change might be the trajectory over time from identity variation.


On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 5:20 PM, Luisa Soares-Miranda
<> wrote:
> Dear All,
> I have one  doubt and I think you can help me. I am a Phd student and I have conducted one mix-model analysis using the command  xtmixed to analyze associations over 3 years of data. so I have  xi: xtmixed ....  || codigo: i.year, covariance(identity). So my question is can I interpret the coefficient as I interpret it in a linear regression? For example if I increase  one unit in my exposure the outcome will change Coef. over time? Or I should only  say that exposure and outcome are associated and in each direction, over time.
> thank you so much
> regards
> Luisa
> *
> *   For searches and help try:
> *
> *
> *

About me:

*   For searches and help try:

© Copyright 1996–2015 StataCorp LP   |   Terms of use   |   Privacy   |   Contact us   |   Site index