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: RE: AW: RE: AW: recode 9, 99, 999,..., into missing
From
Michael McCulloch <[email protected]>
To
[email protected]
Subject
Re: st: RE: AW: RE: AW: recode 9, 99, 999,..., into missing
Date
Mon, 17 May 2010 09:43:17 -0700
Great discussion. In the most recent strategy posted by Martin, which
observations in the simulation were intended to be coded as missing,
and which as real data? I added observations numbers to Martin's code
(gen id = _n) to manually inspect the data, and noticed that for
observation #8, var4 is changed to missing, whereas for observation
#4, var4 is not changed to missing.
Michael
On May 17, 2010, at 9:30 AM, Lachenbruch, Peter wrote:
Looks good to me.
Tony
Peter A. Lachenbruch
Department of Public Health
Oregon State University
Corvallis, OR 97330
Phone: 541-737-3832
FAX: 541-737-4001
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]
] On Behalf Of Martin Weiss
Sent: Monday, May 17, 2010 12:35 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: AW: st: RE: AW: RE: AW: recode 9, 99, 999,..., into missing
<>
What does the -mvdecode- solution look like then? Like this?
*************
clear*
inp byte(var1 var2) int(var3 var4)
1 1 1 1
2 2 2 2
3 3 3 3
4 8 99 999
5 9 100 1000
6 10 101 1001
7 11 150 5000
9 12 999 9999
end
foreach var of varlist *{
sum `var', mean
if r(max)<=9 mvdecode `var', mv(9)
else if inrange(r(max),10,99) mvdecode `var', mv(99)
else if inrange(r(max),100,999) mvdecode `var', mv(999)
else mvdecode `var', mv(9999)
}
li, noo
*************
HTH
Martin
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] Im Auftrag von Steve
Samuels
Gesendet: Montag, 17. Mai 2010 03:00
An: [email protected]
Betreff: Re: st: RE: AW: RE: AW: recode 9, 99, 999,..., into missing
Mandy, if you know this much about each variable, I see no advantaqe
or necessity to your approach. -mvdecode- appears to be superior in
every way. It is not only more direct, clearer, and will handle
all the other "non-data" codes. Clarity is very important: other
people (and you, perhaps, in the future) will be able to understand
your Stata statements without any lengthy explanation. None of the
other solutions can claim that.
Steve
On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 8:33 PM, Amanda Fu <[email protected]>
wrote:
Dear Mr. Weiss and Lachenbruch,
I am sorry that I should be more clear when describing my question.
In
my opinion, I need to be careful about this problem : for example,
for
a variable that has 10 scales, the 9 value means a real scale and 99
in that case means "not answered".
The pattern is like this:
(1) if the maximum value of a variable is smaller than 9 , then the
"not answered" takes the value 9;
(2) if the maximum value of a variable is smaller than 99 but
greater
than 10, then the "not answered" takes the value 99;
(3) if the maximum value of a variable is smaller than 999 but
greater than 100, then the "not answered" takes the value 999;
and so on.
(And you are absolutely right for the reminder that there are values
such as 7,8, 98, or 97 to indicate "refused to answer" "invalid
answer". Here I would like to keep focus on one example of "not
answered" , because the other values could be dealt with using the
same way.)
Thanks for help from both of you!
Best regards,
Amanda
*
* 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/
--
Steven Samuels
[email protected]
18 Cantine's Island
Saugerties NY 12477
USA
Voice: 845-246-0774
Fax: 206-202-4783
*
* 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/
Best wishes,
Michael McCulloch, LAc MPH PhD
Pine Street Foundation
124 Pine Street
San Anselmo, CA 94960-2674
tel: 415-407-1357
fax: 206-338-2391
*
* 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/