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]

From |
Ingeborg Forthun <ingeborg.forthun@gmail.com> |

To |
statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu |

Subject |
Re: st: Looping over variables |

Date |
Wed, 19 Dec 2012 13:30:00 +0100 |

I am sorry if I have misunderstood, but the two codes do not give the same result. The first code: gen n_preg = 0 forval j = 95(6)149 { local J = `j' + 1 replace n_preg = n_preg + inlist(aa`j', 1, 5) | (inlist(aa`j', 2, 3, 4, 6, 7) & inrange(aa`J', 13, .)) } returns: n_preg | Freq. Percent Cum. ------------+----------------------------------- 0 | 46,703 45.91 45.91 1 | 55,024 54.09 100.00 ------------+----------------------------------- Total | 101,727 100.00 The second code: gen n_preg = 0 forval j = 95(6)149 { local J = `j' + 1 replace n_preg = n_preg + 1 if inlist(aa`j', 1, 5) | (inlist(aa`j', 2, 3, 4, 6, 7) & inrange(aa`J', 13, .)) } returns: n_preg | Freq. Percent Cum. ------------+----------------------------------- 0 | 46,703 45.91 45.91 1 | 35,664 35.06 80.97 2 | 15,164 14.91 95.88 3 | 3,303 3.25 99.12 4 | 682 0.67 99.79 5 | 143 0.14 99.93 6 | 35 0.03 99.97 7 | 19 0.02 99.99 8 | 7 0.01 99.99 9 | 4 0.00 100.00 10 | 3 0.00 100.00 ------------+----------------------------------- Total | 101,727 100.00 This is what I need to know. I have to know the exact number of pregnancies and not only 0 or 1. Ingeborg 2012/12/19 Nick Cox <njcoxstata@gmail.com>: > This is likely to be confusing to others. > > As you say, you want to count the number of pregnancies and my code, > along the lines suggested by Daniel, does that. It does that because > the logical condition evaluates to 1 or 0, which gives you the right > answer. > > In a simpler example if you are counting instances of 42 or 43 then > > inlist(42, 42, 43) > > returns 1 and > > inlist (24, 42, 43) > > returns 0 -- so in a loop you can use that result directly. You could > say something like > > replace n42_43 = n42_43 + inlist(<whatever>, 42, 43) > > You don't have to say > > replace n42_43 = n42_43 + 1 if inlist(<whatever>, 42, 43) > > If you want to write it your way, that's fine, but there is no sense > in which you _have_ to do that. > > Nick > > On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 9:56 AM, Ingeborg Forthun > <ingeborg.forthun@gmail.com> wrote: >> Thank you very much for your advice! It works! But as I want to count >> the number of pregnancies for each observation (forgot to write this >> in my first e-mail!) I had to add +1 in the third line in order for it >> to add 1 for each pregnancy. >> >> gen n_preg = 0 >> >> . forval j = 95(6)149 { >> 2. local J = `j' + 1 >> 3. replace n_preg = n_preg + 1 if inlist(aa`j', 1, 5) | >> (inlist(aa`j', 2, 3, 4, 6, 7) & inrange(aa`J', 13, .)) >> 4. } >> >> >> Ingeborg >> >> >> 2012/12/18 Nick Cox <njcoxstata@gmail.com> >>> >>> I agree with Daniel's main advice. You can simplify this (e.g.) >>> >>> gen n_preg = 0 >>> forval j = 95(6)149 { >>> local J = `j' + 1 >>> replace n_preg = n_preg + inlist(aa`j', 1, 5) | (inlist(aa`j', 2, 3, >>> 4, 6, 7) & inrange(aa`J', 13, .)) >>> } >>> >>> See also for specific and general advice: >>> >>> [D] functions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . inlist() programming function >>> (help inlist()) >>> >>> [D] functions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . inrange() programming function >>> (help inrange()) >>> >>> SJ-9-1 pr0046 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Speaking Stata: Rowwise >>> (help rowsort, rowranks if installed) . . . . . . . . . . . N. J. Cox >>> Q1/09 SJ 9(1):137--157 >>> shows how to exploit functions, egen functions, and Mata >>> for working rowwise; rowsort and rowranks are introduced >>> >>> SJ-6-4 dm0026 . . . . . . Stata tip 39: In a list or out? In a range or out? >>> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . N. J. Cox >>> Q4/06 SJ 6(4):593--595 (no commands) >>> tip for use of inlist() and inrange() >>> >>> It seems also that the names of your variables bear little relation to >>> their contents. Systematic use of -rename- is likely to make further >>> analysis much easier (and less error-prone). >>> >>> Finally, for "STATA" read "Stata", and please read the Statalist FAQ >>> to see why. >>> >>> Nick >>> >>> On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 8:47 AM, daniel klein <klein.daniel.81@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> > You could probably create a loop over the values 95, 101 and so on, >>> > and add 1 to the respective number inside the loop to get at the >>> > durration. But I would look at -egen-'s -anycount()- function first. >>> > This might be a good way of approching this. >>> >>> Ingeborg Forthun >>> >>> > [...] >>> > I want to make a variable that counts the number of pregnancies for each >>> > woman if outcome is 1 or 5 or if outcome is 2,3,4,6 or 7 and number of >>> > weeks of pregnancy was more than 12 weeks. Number of weeks of >>> > pregnancy is given by aa96 (corresponding to the outcome of the first >>> > pregnancy given by aa95), aa102 (corresponding to the outcome of the >>> > second pregnancy given by aa101), and so on. > * > * 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: Looping over variables***From:*Nick Cox <njcoxstata@gmail.com>

**References**:**Re: st: Looping over variables***From:*daniel klein <klein.daniel.81@gmail.com>

**Re: st: Looping over variables***From:*Nick Cox <njcoxstata@gmail.com>

**Re: st: Looping over variables***From:*Ingeborg Forthun <ingeborg.forthun@gmail.com>

**Re: st: Looping over variables***From:*Nick Cox <njcoxstata@gmail.com>

- Prev by Date:
**st: Stata Journal Editors' Prize 2012: David Roodman** - Next by Date:
**Re: st: Looping over variables** - Previous by thread:
**Re: st: Looping over variables** - Next by thread:
**Re: st: Looping over variables** - Index(es):