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 |
Csaba Kertai <csaba.kertai@hotmail.co.uk> |

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

Subject |
RE: st: Missing observations |

Date |
Thu, 20 Jun 2013 20:44:55 +0200 |

Thank you Nick. Could you let me know what is not clear about this, please? Let me explain what I want to do in another way. I have 9 variables each having different number of values. These 9 variables are return variables (e.g. 1-year raw return, 2-year raw return etc.) and I need to compare the means/medians/25th/75th/90th percentiles and the percentage of positive values (within one 'group') of these variables to see whether, say, the median difference between the 1-yr raw return 'group' and the 2-yr raw return 'group' is significant. For this, I have to use traditional parametric tests (i.e. the t-test) and non-parametric bootstrapping. Could you help me with this, please? I've been scouring the Internet for a solution to testing percentile differences but it seems that there's not much on this particular issue. There are basically three things I cannot get my head round: how to test the median difference of 2 'groups' (tried 'signrank' and 'signtest' but these tests are paired tests), the percentiles difference of two 'groups', and the difference of the percentage of positive values between 2 'groups'. So you say that one solution could be to stack the 9 variables on top of each other and then group them by, say, inserting a second column (grouping variable) with numbers that will identify the 9 groups? Thank you ---------------------------------------- > Subject: Re: st: Missing observations > From: njcoxstata@gmail.com > Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2013 18:29:32 +0100 > To: statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu > > This is really isn't clear to me, but it may be that -var1- and -var2- should be stacked on top of each other. > > Nick > njcoxstata@gmail.com > > On 20 Jun 2013, at 15:41, Csaba <csaba.kertai@hotmail.co.uk> wrote: > >> Nick, >> >> Thank you for your reply. Yes you are right I muddled up observations with values. I meant to write values not observations. My problem is that if I use 'drop if missing(var2)' that will drop values for each variable in my data set. >> >> I need to compare the means/medians of 2 variables. Var1 has 1125 non-missing values, var2 has 169 non-missing values. I might be doing sth wrong but when I try using bootstrapping I get a message saying that I should drop any missing values as bootstrapping cannot distinguish between missing and non-missing values. That's why I want to drop missing values for Var2. Basically, I want to achieve the same result as with the unpaired two-sample mean comparison test but with bootstrapping. >> >> Thanks a lot! >> >> On 20 Jun 2013, at 12:32, Nick Cox <njcoxstata@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> -drop- as used here drops entire observations (outside Stata >>> observations are known as rows, cases, records). You seem to be under >>> the impression that there is an operation >>> >>> drop missing values >>> >>> that is somehow different from >>> >>> -drop- observations >>> >>> but I don't know what that would look like. >>> >>> In your example if -var2- has only 169 non-missing values (_not_ >>> observations) then >>> >>> drop if missing(var2) >>> >>> will leave precisely 169 observations. I don't understand how that is >>> a surprise or what else you want. >>> >>> Nick >>> njcoxstata@gmail.com >>> >>> >>> On 20 June 2013 11:17, Csaba Kertai <csaba.kertai@hotmail.co.uk> wrote: >>> >>>> I need a bit of help with dropping missing observations. If I use 'drop if missing(var)' or drop if 'var'==. etc. many other observations are dropped as well. More precisely, var1 has 1125 observations and var2 has 169 observations. I want to drop missing observations for var2 but if I use drop if var2==. then this will keep only 169 observations for each variable. I only want to drop values that are missing. >>> >>> * >>> * 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/ > > * > * 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: Missing observations***From:*David Hoaglin <dchoaglin@gmail.com>

**Re: st: Missing observations***From:*Nick Cox <njcoxstata@gmail.com>

**References**:**st: Missing observations***From:*Csaba Kertai <csaba.kertai@hotmail.co.uk>

**Re: st: Missing observations***From:*Nick Cox <njcoxstata@gmail.com>

**Re: st: Missing observations***From:*Csaba <csaba.kertai@hotmail.co.uk>

**Re: st: Missing observations***From:*njcoxstata@gmail.com

- Prev by Date:
**Re: st: Missing observations** - Next by Date:
**st: Verify that all values of a variable are mapped after -label values-** - Previous by thread:
**Re: st: Missing observations** - Next by thread:
**Re: st: Missing observations** - Index(es):