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, is already up and running.

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

Re: st: ln transform and box cox

From   Maarten Buis <>
Subject   Re: st: ln transform and box cox
Date   Wed, 6 Mar 2013 16:16:27 +0100

On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 4:07 PM, Thomas Norris wrote:
> I am running estimated fetal weight growth models. Weight shows increasing variance as gestation proceeds so I was advised to take the natural logarithm of weight to address this issue. However I am having doubts about whether this transformation is appropriate. Should I instead use a box cox transformation of the weight variable?
> If this is the case, how would I proceed with running the box cox? I have used the help and see that the syntax is straightforward, but I don't know how I would include the independent variables (age), as in my case, this is what I am trying to find out, ie which age term(s) best describe the data using the fracpoly command. With natural log weight, the best 2 degree fracpoly was with age terms 1 and 2 (fracpoly command didn't converge on raw scale), but if I put these in the box cox, they are based on natural logged data, which is the thing I am doubting.

Generally, the advise on this list is not transform the
dependent/explained/response/left-hand-side/y variable but to use a
log-link function instead. See:

Your real problem problem appears to be the combination of -fracpoly-
and -boxcox-, which is not allowed. You can use either -glm- or
-poisson- with -fracpoly-, thus solving your problem.

-- Maarten

Maarten L. Buis
Reichpietschufer 50
10785 Berlin

*   For searches and help try:

© Copyright 1996–2015 StataCorp LP   |   Terms of use   |   Privacy   |   Contact us   |   Site index