Bookmark and Share

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: micombine versus mim


From   Anders Alexandersson <andersalex@gmail.com>
To   statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu
Subject   Re: st: micombine versus mim
Date   Mon, 24 Jan 2011 10:28:50 -0500

Elisabetta, use the more comprehensive -mim-, not -micombine-, as
stated in SJ 9:3 on page 466.
Both are user-written commands. The article is available here:
http://www.stata-journal.com/article.html?article=st0067_4

For more assistance, please provide an example that is easy to replicate.

Anders Alexandersson
andersalex@gmail.com



On Sat, Jan 22, Elisabetta Petracci <elisabetta.petracci@gmail.com> wrote:

> anybody can tell why when I obtain different estimates when using
> command "micombine" compared to "mim" using STATA 11?
> I downloaded "mim" last version by Royston.
> I have imputed missing values doing 15 replications and to performe,
> in the end, a quantile regression.
*
*   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/


© Copyright 1996–2018 StataCorp LLC   |   Terms of use   |   Privacy   |   Contact us   |   Site index