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, statalist.org is already up and running.


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

st: Mhbounds v.s. rbounds in stata


From   Wen Ci <ivwen.ci@gmail.com>
To   "statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu" <statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu>
Subject   st: Mhbounds v.s. rbounds in stata
Date   Sat, 23 Feb 2013 08:18:26 -0400

Dear readers,
I employed the mhbounds after psmatch2. My outcome variable and treatment variable are all binary variables and I think the mhbounds are a better choice compared to rbounds.
However the mhbounds produce all insignificant results even when gamm=1, which is inconsistent with my matching results.
I also tried the rbounds, which produce normal results for my matching.
Is it because the mhbounds are designed for the matching without replacement? My matching is completed with replacement due to the sample size limitation.
Thank you for your answer.
Best,

Wen
*
*   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/


© Copyright 1996–2014 StataCorp LP   |   Terms of use   |   Privacy   |   Contact us   |   Site index