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: Odd results with -estimates- command


From   DE SOUZA Eric <[email protected]>
To   "'[email protected]'" <[email protected]>
Subject   RE: st: Odd results with -estimates- command
Date   Mon, 4 Nov 2013 20:42:55 +0100

Yes, that works partially in that the results are shown.
But one can no longer specify the order. That can be solved by moving the rows.
Thanks very much.


Eric de Souza 
College of Europe 
Brugge (Bruges), Belgium 
http://www.coleurope.eu




-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jeff Pitblado, StataCorp LP
Sent: 04 November 2013 20:28
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: st: Odd results with -estimates- command

Eric DE SOUZA <[email protected]> using -estimates table- to report a table of common coefficients in -regress-, -logit-, and -probit- model fits but not all the requested coefficients are being reported:

> The output below explains the subject header.
> If bOLS is placed in the last column it does not print If bOLS is 
> placed in the first column, the other two do not print.
> 
> . use ch13.dta
> 
> . reg fishmode lnrelp
> 
> . estimates store bOLS
> 
> . logit fishmode lnrelp
> 
> . estimates store blogit
> 
> . probit fishmode lnrelp, nolog
> 
> . estimates store bprobit
> 
> . estimates table blogit bprobit bOLS, t stats(N ll r2 r2_p) b(%10.4f) 
> keep(_cons lnrelp)
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------
>     Variable |   blogit      bprobit        bOLS     
> -------------+---------------------------------------
>        _cons |     2.0531       1.1944               
>              |      12.15        13.34               
>       lnrelp |    -1.8225      -1.0555               
>              |     -12.61       -13.87               
> -------------+---------------------------------------
>            N |        630          630          630  
>           ll |  -206.8270    -204.4109    -195.1673  
>           r2 |                               0.4633  
>         r2_p |     0.4486       0.4550               
> -----------------------------------------------------
>                                           legend: b/t
> 
> . estimates table bOLS blogit bprobit, t stats(N ll r2 r2_p) b(%10.4f) 
> keep(_cons lnrelp)
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------
>     Variable |    bOLS        blogit      bprobit    
> -------------+---------------------------------------
>        _cons |     0.7842                            
>              |      58.21                            
>       lnrelp |    -0.2429                            
>              |     -23.28                            
> -------------+---------------------------------------
>            N |        630          630          630  
>           ll |  -195.1673    -206.8270    -204.4109  
>           r2 |     0.4633                            
>         r2_p |                  0.4486       0.4550  
> -----------------------------------------------------
>                                           legend: b/t

We suspect that the problem is due to -logit- and -probit- attaching an equation name for the coefficients in -e(b)-, but -regress- is not.

A work around is to replace the -keep(_cons turn)- option with -eq(1)-.

--Jeff
[email protected]
*
*   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/

*
*   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/


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