I don't know about -listcoef-, but -estadd ebsd- computes the sd using
-summarize- on the observations identified by e(sample) (and e(subpop)
if defined), and applying the appropriate weights. Did you use the
-subpop()- option in your models? This might explain the difference.
If you want tabulate results from listcoef, then do something like the
following:
. nbreg ...
. listcoef, matrix //-matrix- saves results in r(); type -return
list- for details
. matrix b_facts = r(b_facts)
. estadd matrix b_facts = b_facts
. estout ., cell(b b_facts) style(smcl)
ben
PS: A set of -estadd- commands to support the -spost- package is in preparation.
On 9/24/07, Carter Rees <[email protected]> wrote:
> Statalist,
>
> Windows XP, Stata 10 SE.
>
> I am using svy: nbreg to run a series of regressions and then using -estout-
> to format my regression tables. Instead of the raw b's my tables display
> the standardized factor change coefficients via the -estadd- ebsd option.
>
> All is well and good except the standardized factor change coefficients
> don't precisely match those displayed if I check them using -listcoef-,
> help. My assumption is that -listcoef- takes into account the survey design
> when calculating the sd of the independent variables while -estadd- ebsd may
> not. If this is the case, how can I include the standardized factor change
> coef's as computed by -listcoef- in my -estout- generated table?
>
> Much appreciated.
>
> Carter
>
>
> *
> * For searches and help try:
> * http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/res/findit.html
> * http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
> * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/
>
*
* For searches and help try:
* http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/res/findit.html
* http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
* http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/
