Notice: On April 23, 2014, Statalist moved from an email list to a forum, based at statalist.org.
| From | "JVerkuilen (Gmail)" <jvverkuilen@gmail.com> |
| To | statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu |
| Subject | Re: st: why don't confidence intervals from -proportion- use the same formula as -ci-? |
| Date | Fri, 11 Jan 2013 10:30:42 -0500 |
Oh, it turns out that a fairly reasonable confidence interval for
these data is obtained by using the logit:
. logit outcome [fweight = freq]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
outcome | Coef. Std. Err. z P>|z| [95% Conf. Interval]
-------------+----------------------------------------------------------------
_cons | -2.351375 .7400129 -3.18 0.001 -3.801774 -.9009767
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just transform this confidence interval with the inverse logit.
Oh, one more tidbit:
. ci outcome, binomial wald
-- Binomial Wald ---
Variable | Obs Mean Std. Err. [95% Conf. Interval]
-------------+---------------------------------------------------------------
outcome | 23 .0869565 .0587534 0 .202111*
(*) The Wald interval was clipped at the lower endpoint
*
* 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/