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: Re: st: binary mediation command
From
"Ariel Linden. DrPH" <[email protected]>
To
<[email protected]>
Subject
Re: Re: st: binary mediation command
Date
Mon, 4 Jul 2011 10:04:16 -0700
See the following website for a better understanding of how you use and
interpret binary_mediation.
http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/faq/binary_mediation.htm
Ariel
Date: Sun, 03 Jul 2011 15:44:09 -0400
From: Pina Valle <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: st: binary mediation command
Even when using percentile confidence intervals, is this output relevant
since I am trying to determine the proportion mediated by the indirect
effect?
Indirect effects with binary response variable evercoh
indir_1 = .00601173 (adrel, binary)
total indirect = .00601173
direct effect = .10223182
total effect = .10824356
c_path = .10680445
proportion of total effect mediated = .05553895 ratio of indirect to direct
effect = .05880491 Binary models use logit regression
Thanks
Pina
- ----- Original Message -----
From: Philip Ender <[email protected]>
Date: Wednesday, June 15, 2011 4:21 pm
Subject: Re: st: binary mediation command
To: [email protected]
> Pina Valle wrote:
>
> >I am trying to test mediation with a dichotomous outcome, and I
> have looked around and found a command in >STATA called
> binary_mediation. However, there isn't really any indication in the
> notes I found on whether the >mediation is significant. Here is an
> example of my output along with the commands that I have used:
> >...
>
> The documentation for -binary_mediation states: This program does not
> provide standard errors or statistical tests for coefficients.
> Bootstrap standard errors and confidence intervals are recommended for
> this purpose.
>
> Using either the percentile or bias corrected confidence intervals,
> whichever you prefer, intervals that contain zero are not significant
> at the stated level while those that do not contain zero are
> significant. Traditional statistical tests are likely to lead to
> biased p-values. I think the confidence interval approach is safer.
>
> Phil
> --
> Phil Ender
> UCLA Statistical Consulting Group
*
* 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/