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]

From |
"Carlo Lazzaro" <carlo.lazzaro@tiscalinet.it> |

To |
<statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu> |

Subject |
R: st: Interpretation of Two-sample t test with equal variances? |

Date |
Thu, 21 Mar 2013 09:10:04 +0100 |

Dear Gwinyai, if you prefer to avoid a discussion about the indications for C/section, you can consider some hospital features as predictors instead (e.g.: public or private; teaching hospital or else; number of beds of the obstetrics unit grouped in different categories (0-10; .....); number of births per year grouped in different categories; ...). Kind regards, Carlo -----Messaggio originale----- Da: owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu [mailto:owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu] Per conto di Gwinyai Masukume Inviato: mercoledì 20 marzo 2013 22:07 A: statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu Oggetto: Re: st: Interpretation of Two-sample t test with equal variances? Carlo - thanks, i was skeptical about going into a discussion about the indications for C/section which can be relative or absolute; maternal, fetal or materno-fetal. Austin - thanks for the link and pointing out that a pseudo R2 should not be a worry. by increasing the sample size a thousand fold i guess what that which is being detected is so small that in the end it's not worth it (detecting something so small)? Thanks all round. Appreciated. G * * 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: Interpretation of Two-sample t test with equal variances?***From:*Gwinyai Masukume <parturitions@gmail.com>

**References**:**st: Interpretation of Two-sample t test with equal variances?***From:*Gwinyai Masukume <parturitions@gmail.com>

**Re: st: Interpretation of Two-sample t test with equal variances?***From:*Richard Williams <richardwilliams.ndu@gmail.com>

**Re: st: Interpretation of Two-sample t test with equal variances?***From:*Gwinyai Masukume <parturitions@gmail.com>

**R: st: Interpretation of Two-sample t test with equal variances?***From:*"Carlo Lazzaro" <carlo.lazzaro@tiscalinet.it>

**Re: st: Interpretation of Two-sample t test with equal variances?***From:*David Hoaglin <dchoaglin@gmail.com>

**R: st: Interpretation of Two-sample t test with equal variances?***From:*"Carlo Lazzaro" <carlo.lazzaro@tiscalinet.it>

**Re: st: Interpretation of Two-sample t test with equal variances?***From:*Gwinyai Masukume <parturitions@gmail.com>

**Re: st: Interpretation of Two-sample t test with equal variances?***From:*Nick Cox <njcoxstata@gmail.com>

**Re: st: Interpretation of Two-sample t test with equal variances?***From:*Gwinyai Masukume <parturitions@gmail.com>

**Re: st: Interpretation of Two-sample t test with equal variances?***From:*Austin Nichols <austinnichols@gmail.com>

**Re: st: Interpretation of Two-sample t test with equal variances?***From:*Gwinyai Masukume <parturitions@gmail.com>

- Prev by Date:
**Re: st: Incomplete results of linear regression with interaction variable** - Next by Date:
**Re: st: mata programming - input type** - Previous by thread:
**Re: st: Interpretation of Two-sample t test with equal variances?** - Next by thread:
**Re: st: Interpretation of Two-sample t test with equal variances?** - Index(es):