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: AW: Missing F statistics.
From
natasha agarwal <[email protected]>
To
[email protected]
Subject
Re: st: AW: Missing F statistics.
Date
Tue, 22 Jun 2010 13:35:56 +0100
Hi there,
I have read the material available on the archive.
The solutions provided were to include or define the clusters in a
different fashion so that the number of clusters are more than the
number of constrains in austin's reply on
http://www.stata.com/statalist/archive/2008-07/msg00188.html
But in situations where there are no other way to define the clusters
and hence the number of constrains are more than the number of
clusters, can one still report with the results obtained with the
missing F value? As far as I understand it won't be right to report
such results as (1) number of clusters is not going to infinity, 50;
or (2) there aren't 20 large balanced clusters; (3) M-k also does not
go to infinity.
Is there any other solution to the problem?
Thanks
Natasha
*
* 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/