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: time in xtmixed
From
megan rossi <[email protected]>
To
<[email protected]>
Subject
st: time in xtmixed
Date
Mon, 25 Mar 2013 23:12:21 +1000
How is this for confusing, when time is as a continuous variable (ie. option a)the association between depvar and indepvar is significant (time is borderline sig p=0.055), however as a categorical variable, option b, the relationship between depvar and indepvar becomes insignificant...and time 1 and 2 become very insignificant (p=0.55 and 0.17)
In both scenario's the overall significance of the model is <0.0001 and log likelihoods are the same. The interaction between indepvar and time is only significant at time 0 not 1 or 2.
If I did go with option a, could I really say that independent of time depvar and indepvar are association?
Megan Rossi APD
PhD Candidate School of Medicine, University of Queensland
Accredited Practicing Dietitian
Princess Alexandra Hospital Nutrition & Dietetic Department
m: 0402 931 441 | e: [email protected]
"Let food be thy medicine and medicine be thy food." — Hippocrates (ca. 460 – 377 BC)
********************************************************************************
This email, including any attachments sent with it, is confidential and for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). This confidentiality is not waived or lost, if you receive it and you are not the intended recipient(s), or if it is transmitted/received in error.
Any unauthorised use, alteration, disclosure, distribution or review of this email is strictly prohibited. The information contained in this email, including any attachment sent with it, may be subject to a statutory duty of confidentiality if it relates to health service matters.
**********************************************************************************
> Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2013 07:22:51 -0400
> Subject: Re: st: time in xtmixed
> From: [email protected]
> To: [email protected]
>
> Megan,
>
> To expand on Maarten's reply, i.time will give you separate effects
> for the second and third time points (and the effect at the first time
> point will be part of the constant term). If you use time as a
> "continuous" predictor, its coefficient will be the slope of depvar
> against time (adjusted for the contribution of indepvar), and the
> constant term will correspond to time = 0. The second model is
> simpler, but it assumes that the contribution of time is linear.
>
> David Hoaglin
>
> On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 3:06 AM, megan rossi <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Hi Stata Guru's,
> > Can anyone advise me on whether I need to include time variable as a categorical variable (ie. have a prefix i.) in xtmixed or can it be treated as a continous variable even though the data was collected at only three time points (evenly spaced). My research question: is depvar associated with indepvar independent of time ie. is syntax a or b most appropriate:
> > a) xtmixed depvar indepvar time||ptid:time,cov(uns)
> > or
> > b) xtmixed depvar indepvar i.time||ptid:time,cov(uns)
> > I noticed that the stata youtube video on this doesn't include i. however it was from 9 time points, not 3.
> > Cheers,
> > Megan Rossi APD
>
> *
> * For searches and help try:
> * http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search
> * http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/resources/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/faqs/resources/statalist-faq/
* http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/