 Notice: On April 23, 2014, Statalist moved from an email list to a forum, based at statalist.org.

# st: strange coefficients in xtnbreg

 From Dalhia To statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu Subject st: strange coefficients in xtnbreg Date Wed, 15 Dec 2010 09:02:30 -0800 (PST)

```Hi,

I have panel data on hospitals (private, public, and associates), and looking at the averages of the number of training days that each hospital type underwent, I can see that private hospitals have lower number of training days compared to public hospitals. Associate hospitals fall in the mid-range. However, when I run this model using xtnbreg (with random effects), I get a funny result. It looks like public and associates have lower rate of training days in a year compared to private. Am I interpreting the coefficients wrong or is there something else going on? (output attached below).

Thanks
dalhia

xtnbreg train asso pub if train<12000, re irr
note: you are responsible for interpretation of non-count dep. variable

Fitting negative binomial (constant dispersion) model:

Iteration 0:   log likelihood = -1341968.9
Iteration 1:   log likelihood = -1341967.5
Iteration 2:   log likelihood = -1341967.5

Iteration 0:   log likelihood = -504693.72
Iteration 1:   log likelihood = -35614.007
Iteration 2:   log likelihood =  -35604.55
Iteration 3:   log likelihood = -35604.545
Iteration 4:   log likelihood = -35604.545

Iteration 0:   log likelihood = -35604.545
Iteration 1:   log likelihood = -35595.175
Iteration 2:   log likelihood = -35595.145
Iteration 3:   log likelihood = -35595.145

Fitting full model:

Iteration 0:   log likelihood = -81145.913
Iteration 1:   log likelihood = -49940.372  (not concave)
Iteration 2:   log likelihood = -42786.562  (not concave)
Iteration 3:   log likelihood = -35793.307
Iteration 4:   log likelihood =  -33256.88
Iteration 5:   log likelihood = -33190.785
Iteration 6:   log likelihood = -33150.666
Iteration 7:   log likelihood = -33150.622
Iteration 8:   log likelihood = -33150.622

Random-effects negative binomial regression     Number of obs      =      7522
Group variable: fi                              Number of groups   =      1873

Random effects u_i ~ Beta                       Obs per group: min =         1
avg =       4.0
max =         5

Wald chi2(2)       =      7.29
Log likelihood  = -33150.622                    Prob > chi2        =    0.0261

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
train |        IRR   Std. Err.      z    P>|z|     [95% Conf. Interval]
-------------+----------------------------------------------------------------
asso |   .8803461   .0551126    -2.04   0.042     .7786914    .9952712
pub |   .9029852   .0380889    -2.42   0.016     .8313349    .9808108
-------------+----------------------------------------------------------------
/ln_r |  -.8268984   .0334362                     -.8924322   -.7613647
/ln_s |   .7346747   .0714634                      .5946091    .8747404
-------------+----------------------------------------------------------------
r |   .4374038   .0146251                      .4096582    .4670286
s |   2.084804   .1489872                      1.812322    2.398253
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Likelihood-ratio test vs. pooled: chibar2(01) =  4889.04 Prob>=chibar2 = 0.000

*
*   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/
```