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: xtmelogit: interpretation of the _cons and level 1 predictors
From
Joao Carapinha <[email protected]>
To
[email protected]
Subject
st: xtmelogit: interpretation of the _cons and level 1 predictors
Date
Wed, 5 Oct 2011 13:57:50 -0400
Hi List Members,
I'm applying xtmelogit to understand differences within and between
level 1 and level 2 data. The command I'm using is:
xtmelogit s_QA16Arecode c_wealthindex || QHEA: if chronic1==1, variance mle
and the output is (my question follows below this):
************************************************
Refining starting values:
Iteration 0: log likelihood = -1347.4931
Iteration 1: log likelihood = -1331.2782
Iteration 2: log likelihood = -1330.7283
Performing gradient-based optimization:
Iteration 0: log likelihood = -1330.7283
Iteration 1: log likelihood = -1330.7274
Iteration 2: log likelihood = -1330.7274
Mixed-effects logistic regression Number of obs = 1951
Group variable: QHEA Number of groups = 408
Obs per group: min = 1
avg = 4.8
max = 23
Integration points = 7 Wald chi2(1) = 31.66
Log likelihood = -1330.7274 Prob > chi2 = 0.0000
s_QA16Arecode Coef. Std. Err. z P>z [95% Conf. Interval]
c_wealthindex .2909747 .0517103 5.63 0.000 .1896244 .3923251
_cons .0360156 .0525991 0.68 0.494 -.0670768 .1391079
Random-effects Parameters Estimate Std. Err. [95% Conf. Interval]
QHEA: Identity
var(_cons) .1628087 .0840827 .0591662 .4480037
LR test vs. logistic regression: chibar2(01) = 5.73 Prob>=chibar2 = 0.0083
******************************************************************
Given that the p-value of _cons suggests that it is not a
statistically significant estimation of the intercept and that the
level 1 predictor (c_wealthindex) is statistically significant, would
a fair interpretation be:
The mean estimate of all groups for the outcome is not significantly
different from zero suggesting that there are no groups that are
either significantly below or above the mean. However, the level 1
predictor is significantly different from zero and it is a great
estimate for the differences between individuals within each group.
- Is it possible to have this situation?
- What would explain this?
Many thanks for your kind assistance,
JC
*
* 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/