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]
st: RE: adjust vs. margins revisited
From
"Feiveson, Alan H. (JSC-SK311)" <[email protected]>
To
"[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Subject
st: RE: adjust vs. margins revisited
Date
Fri, 30 Jul 2010 11:21:26 -0500
ROb - I think -margins- can be made to give correct confidence limits if you use something like eyex instead of dydx.
Al
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Tim Wade
Sent: Friday, July 30, 2010 11:08 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: st: adjust vs. margins revisited
Hello Statalisters:
Having recently upgradted to v. 11, I have been testing -margins-
and, like others have discussed on Statalist, I am trying to reconcile
some results compared to the old -adjust-
Here is a simplified example
sysuse auto.dta
logistic foreign price mpg weight
adjust price=4000 mpg weight, pr ci
margins, atmeans at(price=4000)
produces the following:
. adjust price=4000 mpg weight, pr ci
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dependent variable: foreign Equation: foreign Command: logistic
Covariates set to mean: mpg = 21.297297, weight = 3019.4595
Covariate set to value: price = 4000
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------
All | pr lb ub
----------+-----------------------------------
| .005861 [.000219 .137016]
----------------------------------------------
Key: pr = Probability
[lb , ub] = [95% Confidence Interval]
. margins, atmeans at(price=4000)
Adjusted predictions Number of obs = 74
Model VCE : OIM
Expression : Pr(foreign), predict()
at : price = 4000
mpg = 21.2973 (mean)
weight = 3019.459 (mean)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Delta-method
| Margin Std. Err. z P>|z| [95% Conf. Interval]
-------------+----------------------------------------------------------------
_cons | .0058613 .0097907 0.60 0.549 -.0133281 .0250508
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I read the previous postings by Stata Corp's Jeff Pitlblado
(http://www.stata.com/statalist/archive/2009-11/msg00199.html where he
stated:
"The -pr- confidence intervals from -adjust- are computed by transforming the
end-points of the CI limits from the linear prediction.
-margins- computes the CI limits using the normal approximation is valid."
but here margins produces negative confidence bounds on a probability
and also produces quite different results from -adjust-, which seems
to provide reasonable results. It does not seem plausible that both
results could be considered valid. Any thoughts?
Kind regards, Tim
*
* 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/
*
* 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/