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: ICE and two conditions

From   Morten Frydenberg <>
To   "" <>
Subject   RE: st: ICE and two conditions
Date   Thu, 1 Dec 2011 07:57:16 +0100

Thanks Daniel
I have taken a look at the mi version in Stata 12 and it looks like
that might solve my problem.

Morten Frydenberg              Department of Biostatistics 
Associate professor            Aarhus University           Bartholins Allé 2 
Phone +45 871  67992           8000 Aarhus 
Fax   +45 871  67305           Denmark 

-----Original Message-----
From: [] On Behalf Of daniel klein
Sent: 29. november 2011 15:40
Subject: Re: st: ICE and two conditions


I do not have access to Stata at the moment, so I cannot replicate your problem. However, I would like to point out two things.

If you are using Stata 12, there is no need to use -ice- since Stata's
-mi- supports imputationa via chained-equations in the current version. (It is based on the work of Royston). Further, if you use Stata's -mi-, you do not need to specify conditions, as Stata will only impute "hard missings" (i.e. sysmiss). Create soft missing values (i.e. one of .a, .b, ..., .z) in your original dataset according to your conditions, as these values will not be imputed.

*   For searches and help try:

*   For searches and help try:

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