Notice: On March 31, it was **announced** that Statalist is moving from an email list to a **forum**. The old list will shut down at the end of May, 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: svy: total command |

Date |
Wed, 21 Nov 2012 10:40:20 -0600 |

Rebecca: To get the total based on the two data sets, ordinarily, I would say: 1) append the two data sets; 2) use the same -svyset- statement and -total- commands that you used in the original data. The numbers in your results don't correspond to those you reported on Nov 5 "- Regarding the discrepancies in the number of PSUs; I have different number, for example, in the file that collects variables about remittances from household members (PSUs=191) and in the file that collects the same variables about remittances from friends (PSUs=197). This may suggests that in some PSUs, hhs that receive remittances from household members were not sampled." But the -total- statement in the second data set below shows only 90 PSUs, not 197. If the coverage of the "friend" remittance information is incomplete, then I suggest that you report the separate totals and the combined total, but with a note that the total might be wrong. Steve On Nov 20, 2012, at 6:18 AM, Rebecca Pietrelli wrote: Dear Steve, first of all, I am very sorry. My question was inaccurate and I know that time is precious! The survey I am using collects information on households residing in Uganda. Sampling design: A two-stage stratified sample design was adopted. First stage: Selection of Enumeration Areas (ea), proportionally done on the basis of the number of households according to Uganda Household Survey. Also the selection was done separately for urban and rural areas. Second stage: systematic sampling procedure was adopted in order to select (in each ea) 4 households with an international migrant, 3 households with one or more internal migrant and 3 with no migrants. In one data file, for each household, the list of household members living outside the household is reported, with all the information about each migrant, including remittances behaviour. In the second data file, for each household, the list of non-household members who remit to the household is reported, with all the information about each migrant. The aim of my analysis it to compute the total amount of remitters (and remittances), both former household members and non-household members (namely household members and friends), distinguishing internal and international remitters. I used the following commands in both data files. . svyset earea [pw=hhweight], strata(stratum) pweight: hhweight VCE: linearized Single unit: missing Strata 1: stratum SU 1: earea FPC 1: <zero> I have generated a dummy variable, labelled internal, = 1 if the migrant has migrated within Uganda and = 0 if the migrant has migrated out of Uganda. Also I have generated a dummy variable, labelled dremit1, = 1 if the migrant remits and zero otherwhise. I used the following command to compute the total number of remitters in each data files (hh members and friends), distinguishing internal (1) and international(0): First file: former household members: . svy, over(internal): total dremit1 (running total on estimation sample) Survey: Total estimation Number of strata = 2 Number of obs = 1645 Number of PSUs = 191 Population size = 4942119 Design df = 189 0: internal = 0 1: internal = 1 -------------------------------------------------------------- | Linearized Over | Total Std. Err. [95% Conf. Interval] -------------+------------------------------------------------ dremit1 | 0 | 233898.1 29978.48 174762.7 293033.5 1 | 1064315 131143.6 805622.1 1323009 -------------------------------------------------------------- Second file: Non-household members: . svy, over(internal): total dremit1 (running total on estimation sample) Survey: Total estimation Number of strata = 2 Number of obs = 217 Number of PSUs = 90 Population size = 564846 Design df = 88 0: internal = 0 1: internal = 1 -------------------------------------------------------------- | Linearized Over | Total Std. Err. [95% Conf. Interval] -------------+------------------------------------------------ dremit1 | 0 | 101800.5 22591.33 56905 146696 1 | 324690.8 66555.15 192426.4 456955.2 -------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, I think to sum the total numbers of remitters (household members and non-household members), separating internal and international migrants. In other words, the results obtained from the two tables above. Also I have applied the same procedure to compute the total amount of remittances. Is this procedure (working on two data files) correct? The weights are at household level and I am computing the total number of remitters. Is there a problem of bias, like here? If yes, How can I solve it? http://www.stata.com/statalist/archive/2010-09/msg00445.html Thank you and sorry again! Rebecca 2012/11/20 Steve Samuels <sjsamuels@gmail.com>: * * 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/ * * 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/

**Follow-Ups**:**Re: st: svy: total command***From:*Rebecca Pietrelli <rebecca.pietrelli@gmail.com>

**References**:**st: svy: total command***From:*Rebecca Pietrelli <rebecca.pietrelli@gmail.com>

**Re: st: svy: total command***From:*Steve Samuels <sjsamuels@gmail.com>

**Re: st: svy: total command***From:*Rebecca Pietrelli <rebecca.pietrelli@gmail.com>

- Prev by Date:
**st: RE: Interpretation of the Bland-Altman method on Stata** - Next by Date:
**st: Importing multiply imputed panel data** - Previous by thread:
**Re: st: svy: total command** - Next by thread:
**Re: st: svy: total command** - Index(es):