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]

From |
Steve Samuels <sjsamuels@gmail.com> |

To |
statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu |

Subject |
Re: st: best way to estimate overall mean of clustered, stratified data using xtreg |

Date |
Thu, 13 Sep 2012 21:04:26 -0400 |

I don't know what "prospectively chosen" means, but from your choice of words, I assume that clusters were not sampled randomly. Therefore, I'm not sure what you intend for the target population of the mean. 1) If the target is just the 18 control clusters and nothing else, then you you have 100% of the target population. Considering the mean as a descriptive statistic, the standard error will be zero, and -summarize- will give you that mean. 2) If the 12 clusters happened to be selected randomly, then the target population is all births in the three districts during the study period. In that case, then you must compute the probability of selection for each cluster and, as I suggested, use -svy: mean- with districts as strata and clusters as PSUs. If you know the total number of births and other vital statistics for each district, then you can do post-stratification adjustments, including raking (-survwgt- from SSC) and calibration (-calibrate and -calibest- from SSC). If clusters were not of similar size, but were chosen with simple random sampling, then the post-stratification adjustments are a must. 3) If you did not randomly select cluster, you can still attempt to estimate the total for all births in the same district, with the same techniques as in (2), but you must state that the assumptions of random sampling are not met. Note that the intervention evaluation will require of the clustering within district, whether you base inference on the randomization distribution or on some other data generating mechanism. Steve n Sep 13, 2012, at 5:15 AM, Pagel, Christina wrote: Dear Steve, Thanks for replying! The data come from a cluster randomised controlled trial. Basically three different districts were involved. In each district 12 clusters were prospectively chosen and then (within districts) randomised to control or intervention. Within each cluster all births were recorded as well as various protective birth practices associated with each birth. I want to calculate the cluster adjusted mean of the count of birth practices for the control arm only (ie 18 clusters, 6 in each district). The number of births in each cluster ranges from about 350 to 650... does that make it clearer ? Thanks Christina -----Original Message----- From: owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu [mailto:owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu] On Behalf Of Steve Samuels Sent: 12 September 2012 11:26 PM To: statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu Subject: Re: st: best way to estimate overall mean of clustered, stratified data using xtreg You are describing what was apparently a sample survey of three districts. I would recommend that you -svyset- your data and use -svy: mean-. At the very minimum, you would: svyset village [pweight =??], stratum(district). You will have to supply the probability weight. This advice might change if you describe the study design, sampling process, and purpose in more detail. Steve On Sep 12, 2012, at 1:51 PM, Pagel, Christina wrote: I've got data (9000 ish records) that was collected in 18 clusters (villages) in 3 geographical districts (6 clusters in each district). I've got a variable that is an integer count variable and I want to estimate its mean across all the data, taking clustering into account (since there is definitely intra cluster correlation). If there were no districts I would simply do: Xtreg CountVar, i(TrialCluster) re And then the returned constant would be the mean and I'd also get confidence intervals. To take districts into account (the variable is quite dependent on district), I thought I would do: Xtreg CountVar i.District1 i.District2 i.District3, i(TrialCluster) re Where the District variables are mutually exclusive binary variables saying which district the record is in... The question is how do I now get an overall estimate for the mean from the results? One way I thought of is to generate the estimated value for each record and take the mean of that: Gen EstimatedCount=coeff1*District1+coeff2*District2+coeff3*District3+const And then do: Means EstimatedCount To get the estimate of the mean - this works (as in generates a plausible mean) but the condifidence intervals are far too small to be realistic for this data... which makes me think there must be a better way of doing it! Any suggestions would be gratefully received! Christina * * 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/ * * 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/ On Sep 13, 2012, at 5:15 AM, Pagel, Christina wrote: Dear Steve, Thanks for replying! The data come from a cluster randomised controlled trial. Basically three different districts were involved. In each district 12 clusters were prospectively chosen and then (within districts) randomised to control or intervention. Within each cluster all births were recorded as well as various protective birth practices associated with each birth. I want to calculate the cluster adjusted mean of the count of birth practices for the control arm only (ie 18 clusters, 6 in each district). The number of births in each cluster ranges from about 350 to 650... does that make it clearer ? Thanks Christina -----Original Message----- From: owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu [mailto:owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu] On Behalf Of Steve Samuels Sent: 12 September 2012 11:26 PM To: statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu Subject: Re: st: best way to estimate overall mean of clustered, stratified data using xtreg You are describing what was apparently a sample survey of three districts. I would recommend that you -svyset- your data and use -svy: mean-. At the very minimum, you would: svyset village [pweight =??], stratum(district). You will have to supply the probability weight. This advice might change if you describe the study design, sampling process, and purpose in more detail. Steve On Sep 12, 2012, at 1:51 PM, Pagel, Christina wrote: I've got data (9000 ish records) that was collected in 18 clusters (villages) in 3 geographical districts (6 clusters in each district). I've got a variable that is an integer count variable and I want to estimate its mean across all the data, taking clustering into account (since there is definitely intra cluster correlation). If there were no districts I would simply do: Xtreg CountVar, i(TrialCluster) re And then the returned constant would be the mean and I'd also get confidence intervals. To take districts into account (the variable is quite dependent on district), I thought I would do: Xtreg CountVar i.District1 i.District2 i.District3, i(TrialCluster) re Where the District variables are mutually exclusive binary variables saying which district the record is in... The question is how do I now get an overall estimate for the mean from the results? One way I thought of is to generate the estimated value for each record and take the mean of that: Gen EstimatedCount=coeff1*District1+coeff2*District2+coeff3*District3+const And then do: Means EstimatedCount To get the estimate of the mean - this works (as in generates a plausible mean) but the condifidence intervals are far too small to be realistic for this data... which makes me think there must be a better way of doing it! Any suggestions would be gratefully received! Christina * * 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/ * * 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/

**References**:**st: best way to estimate overall mean of clustered, stratified data using xtreg***From:*"Pagel, Christina" <c.pagel@ucl.ac.uk>

**Re: st: best way to estimate overall mean of clustered, stratified data using xtreg***From:*Steve Samuels <sjsamuels@gmail.com>

**RE: st: best way to estimate overall mean of clustered, stratified data using xtreg***From:*"Pagel, Christina" <c.pagel@ucl.ac.uk>

- Prev by Date:
**Re: st: fixing variance parameters in xtmixed to do meta-analysis** - Next by Date:
**Re: st: generate a new categorical variable** - Previous by thread:
**RE: st: best way to estimate overall mean of clustered, stratified data using xtreg** - Next by thread:
**st: fixing variance parameters in xtmixed to do meta-analysis** - Index(es):