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]
st: Haplologit instead of clogit in 1:1 matched study
From
Tasha Amin <[email protected]>
To
Stata list <[email protected]>
Subject
st: Haplologit instead of clogit in 1:1 matched study
Date
Wed, 14 Nov 2012 11:34:31 -0500
Has anyone used -haplologit- in a matched case-control study where -clogit- would have been used instead?
The example in the Stata journal (Marchenko 2008) uses cases and controls that are gender-matched (NAT2 data from section 2.2 of the paper), but it's not clear if this is frequency matched or 1:1 matching.
In my study, my controls are individually matched to cases and I would have used -clogit- to analyze. Is -haplologit- appropriate to account for this matched design?
I am using Stata 11 and this is the basic set up so far.I have survival data where I use incidence density sampling and individual matching and then -clogit.
stset duration, id(id) failure(case==1)
set seed 80223
sttocc, number(2) match(ethnicity)
clogit _case x1 x2, group(_set) or
Any help would be appreciated. Thanks!
Tasha Amin
PhD Student, Epidemiology
*
* For searches and help try:
* http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search
* http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/resources/statalist-faq/
* http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/