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]
Re: st: Imputing for missing proportions
From
Geomina Turlea <[email protected]>
To
[email protected]
Subject
Re: st: Imputing for missing proportions
Date
Sat, 13 Apr 2013 00:03:40 +0100 (BST)
Thank you!
--- On Fri, 4/12/13, JVerkuilen (Gmail) <[email protected]> wrote:
> From: JVerkuilen (Gmail) <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: st: Imputing for missing proportions
> To: [email protected]
> Date: Friday, April 12, 2013, 6:54 PM
> On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 5:44 AM,
> Geomina Turlea <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > I know, but - mi impute- does not support glm either
>
> Best advice I have is to logit transform the proportions and
> then use
> PMM, or just use PMM directly. You probably should try
> several
> different sets of assumptions about the imputation model,
> though. Nick
> is right, MAR is a stronger assumption than many people
> realize and
> harder to make plausible than one would suppose. Outliers
> are also a
> problem with MI approaches. MI spreads the effect all
> throughout the
> dataset.
> *
> * 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/