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

From |
"Martin Weiss" <[email protected]> |

To |
<[email protected]> |

Subject |
AW: st: AW: RE: Problem looping over spells for an individual |

Date |
Fri, 27 Feb 2009 22:04:57 +0100 |

<> It is difficult for an outsider to make up data for your specific problem; therefore either frame the prob in terms of a dataset shipped with Stata or -set trace on- and report the area around the error... HTH Martin -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Im Auftrag von Ilona Carneiro Gesendet: Freitag, 27. Februar 2009 19:09 An: [email protected] Betreff: Re: st: AW: RE: Problem looping over spells for an individual Thanks for these suggestions, Nick. Some of them seem to require "tsset"ing the data. However, I am trying to adapt the code from panelthin.ado, but can't quite get it to work for me. I've been battling with this for a couple of days now and I can't seem to find a way to loop over consecutive observations for an individual. I see that in panelthin, it automatically works separately on each panel because it is tsset, but how can I do this for survival time "stset" data? I've written a little sub-programme to see if I can get this to work. Generation of a local for _N now works and does give the correct count of observations per individual. However, my generation of the tempvar `t' to define the sequential observations (_n) for each individual doesn't work. Any suggestions? capture program drop temp program define temp, byable(recall, noheader) sortpreserve qui{ marksample touse count if `touse' if r(N) == 0 error 2000 tempvar T t sort `_byvars' start by `_byvars': gen `t' = _n * `touse' sort `_byvars' start by `_byvars': gen `T' = _N * `touse' sort `_byvars' start sum `T', meanonly local tmax = r(max) drop `T' replace lagend = (end + 19 + 1) if (anmal > 0 & anmal < .) sort pin start forvalues i = 1(1)`tmax' { drop if end < lagend[`i'-1] & lagend[`i'-1] < . & `t'==`i' & `i'!=1 replace lagend = (end + 21 + 1) if (mal0 > 0 & mal0 < .) & lagend==. & `i'<`tmax' } } end bysort id: temp regards Ilona On 26 Feb 2009, at 13:20, Nick Cox wrote: > Thanks for this, which is good news for me because it explains why > the code I was seeing looked as it did. > > In terms of moving forward, I have a few vague suggestions. > > 0. Spells. See the suggestions on reading and software in the thread > started by Jakob Petersen yesterday. > > <http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/lwgate/STATALIST/archives/statalist.090 2/date/article-1122.html > > > > 1. One is more of style or taste than technique. I prefer to think > in terms of tagging observations I want to keep or work on with 1 > and those I don't with 0. Then you can do almost anything later > > ... if tag > > or > > ... if !tag > > as the case may be. > > An advantage of that style: it is reversible, both within an > algorithm and generally. > (If you really want to -drop- observations, -drop- them in one go > when the selection is final.) > > 2. One strategy might be > > loop over individuals { > -expand- each individual to a block of observations with one > observation per day > <magic bit> > reduce each individual back again > } > > 3. This problem reminds me loosely of one tackled with -panelthin- > on SSC. The code for that may suggest some technique. > > Nick > [email protected] > > Ilona Carneiro > > Many thanks to Nick & Martin for pointing out my error using "if" - > you are correct and that's why it wasn't working. However, I'm still > unable to do what I wanted to. Apologies for posting code which I > tried to simplify, but just made incomprehensible! The snippet was > part of a much larger programme in which the other local macros are > all defined. > > I'll try to clarify. Here is an example of the problem I have. These > are consecutive periods of observations for an individual - the end > denoted by a clinic visit which may or may not be defined as a case > (depending on diagnostic result), or by exit from the study. > > id start end case tx > 1 10 20 1 1 > 1 20 35 1 0 > 1 35 50 1 0 > 1 50 100 . . > > I need to exclude 19 days at risk if the patient received treatment > (tx==1) as this is considered to be prophylaxis, and to avoid counting > the same episode (case==1) twice I also exclude 19 days at risk after > a case is diagnosed. However, as the latter is only to prevent double- > counting it is not necessary if the case has already been > disqualified. > > What I need to get is the following: > > id start end case tx > 1 10 20 1 1 > 1 40 50 1 0 > 1 50 100 . . > > I originally coded the following VERY crudely: > > /* To calculate the gaps */ > sort id start > by id: gen lagend = end + lag if (tx > 0 & tx < .) | (case > 0 & case > < .) & _n!=_N > > > /* To drop periods of time that are disqualified - repeated 3 times as > there may be up to 3 consecutively - to be generalisable, it could be > more */ > sort id start > by id: drop if lagend[_n-1] > end & lagend[_n-1] < . & _n!=1 > sort id start > by id: drop if lagend[_n-1] > end & lagend[_n-1] < . & _n!=1 > sort id start > by id: drop if lagend[_n-1] > end & lagend[_n-1] < . & _n!=1 > sort id start > by id: drop if lagstart > end & lagstart < . & _n!=1 > > /* To update the start date */ > sort id start > by id: replace start = lagend[_n-1] if lagend[_n-1] < . & _n!=1 > sort id start > by id: drop if (end < start | start[_n-1] > end) & end < . & start < . > & _n!=1 > > This works fine for adding a gap after each treatment, as I need to do > this even if the observation period is dropped from the time at risk. > The code gave the following result, as both the 2nd & 3rd episodes > were disqualified, instead of just the 2nd: > > id start end case tx > 1 10 20 1 1 > 1 55 100 . . > > I realise that I need to evaluate the generation of the gap after > cases separately for each observation period, incase the observation > is dropped. But can't seem to find a way to do this. I hope this is a > clearer explanation of the problem. > > On another point, I subsequently use stgen gap = gaplen() to > calculate how much time to exclude from the time at risk. Stata > appears to count one more than just the actual gap, i.e. it will give > me a gap of 20 days between an observation ending with day 20, and a > subsequent observation starting at day 40, when the actual time > excluded in-between is 19 days. I'm just subtracting 1 from the > calculation at present, but is there a reason for this? > > Ilona > > > > On 25 Feb 2009, at 18:27, Martin Weiss wrote: > >> >> <> >> >> >> I was desperate to find an SJ tip for Ilona on the difference >> between "if" >> and "if"; turns out it is an FAQ: >> http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/lang/ifqualifier.html >> >> >> >> >> HTH >> Martin >> >> >> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- >> Von: [email protected] >> [mailto:[email protected]] Im Auftrag von Nick Cox >> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 25. Februar 2009 18:22 >> An: [email protected] >> Betreff: st: RE: Problem looping over spells for an individual >> >> Unless you are working under the aegis of -by:- _N will always be >> interpreted as the total number of observations. This code doesn't >> satisfy that. >> >> I echo Martin Weiss in suspecting that your -if `touse'- is a bug. >> You >> are almost certainly confusing the two flavours of -if-. >> >> Otherwise, your code still looks very confused and based on a >> variety of >> misunderstandings. Apart from `touse', which is defined by - >> marksample-, >> all of the local macros you refer to will be treated as empty >> strings, >> as none has been defined earlier in the program. I am surprised to >> hear >> that it is running at all. >> >> It does not look as if you need a program anyway. My impression is >> that >> all you need is to use -by:- but I don't understand your problem well >> enough to suggest better code. Someone else may be able to give >> better >> help. If not, rather than a lengthy word description, you should >> perhaps >> give an example of your data with the intended result. >> >> Nick >> [email protected] >> >> Ilona Carneiro >> >> I am trying to write a programme that will run a command sequentially >> for observations of an individual. For each individual I have >> multiple >> spells and multiple failures. However, the twist is that I also need >> to exclude a period of time at risk after each treatment >> (prophylaxis) >> and after each failure (to prevent double-counting of failures that >> may actually be the same episode). I managed to do this without any >> problem for the treatment, but if an episode is disqualified (by a >> prior treatment or episode) I don't want it to disqualify a >> subsequent >> episode. Therefore I need to run the code sequentially for each spell >> of an individual, but using the marksample touse code to run it "by" >> individual doesn't seem to be working - the "forvalues" seems to >> always interpret _N as the last observation in the whole dataset, not >> the last observation for each individual. >> >> I have the following code: >> >> program define byid, byable(recall, noheader) >> marksample touse >> sort `id' `start' >> if `touse' { >> forvalues i = 1(1)`=_N' { >> replace lagend = (`end' + `lag') if ((`tx' > 0 & `tx' < >> .) | (`case' >>> 0 & `case' < .)) >> drop if lagend[`i'-1]>`end' & `id'[`i'-1]==`id' >> } >> } >> end >> >> gen lagend=. >> qui by id: byid >> >> but I get the error: >> 2nd by group not found >> r(111); >> >> And the programme isn't doing what I need it to. >> >> >> * >> * For searches and help try: >> * http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search >> * http://www.stata.com/support/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/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/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/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/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/statalist/faq * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/

**References**:**st: Problem looping over spells for an individual***From:*Ilona Carneiro <[email protected]>

**st: RE: Problem looping over spells for an individual***From:*"Nick Cox" <[email protected]>

**st: AW: RE: Problem looping over spells for an individual***From:*"Martin Weiss" <[email protected]>

**Re: st: AW: RE: Problem looping over spells for an individual***From:*Ilona Carneiro <[email protected]>

**RE: st: AW: RE: Problem looping over spells for an individual***From:*"Nick Cox" <[email protected]>

**Re: st: AW: RE: Problem looping over spells for an individual***From:*Ilona Carneiro <[email protected]>

- Prev by Date:
**AW: st: AW: xtdpd syntax v. xtabond2 syntax** - Next by Date:
**st: Using -sampsi- for clustered observations** - Previous by thread:
**Re: st: AW: RE: Problem looping over spells for an individual** - Next by thread:
**st: "starlevels" option for regression table output** - Index(es):

© Copyright 1996–2024 StataCorp LLC | Terms of use | Privacy | Contact us | What's new | Site index |