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: A Tale of Two Macros: Why are these macros producing different results?
From
Sergiy Radyakin <[email protected]>
To
"[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Subject
Re: st: A Tale of Two Macros: Why are these macros producing different results?
Date
Tue, 30 Apr 2013 19:10:54 -0400
Documentation for inlist says that for strings only 10 arguments are supported.
So the following is a problem:
. di inlist("208","150","151", "157", "162", "183","191", "196",
"197", "198", "199", "200", "208")
expression too long
r(130);
Using spaces instead of commas prevents an error, but does not mean
that Stata is working correctly, it merely stops complaining:
. di inlist("208","150","151", "157", "162", "183","191", "196", "197"
"198" "199" "200" "208")
0
Using -destring- on the variable you will get better results on list
search of the reals:
. di inlist(208, 150, 151, 157, 162, 183, 191, 196, 197, 198, 199, 200, 208)
1
Using two lists in the program is an additional source of a potential
error. What if you now need to add an additional diagnosis, e.g. 301,
or need to change 191 to 192?
Best, Sergiy
On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 5:56 PM, William Buchanan
<[email protected]> wrote:
> You have statements that are not equivalent. Check the commas in your first statement.
>
> HTH,
> Billy
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Apr 30, 2013, at 14:37, William Sankey <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Good afternoon Statalist,
>>
>> I have two different macros operating in different parts of my code, I
>> developed the first macro some time ago and the second macro recently.
>> I believed these two macros would give me the same output, however,
>> the first macro is producing far fewer observations than the second.
>> It seems that the first is misclassifying observations and though I
>> cannot figure out why.
>>
>> Any help in deciphering what it is about the first macro that would
>> produce fewer observations would be much appreciated.
>>
>> The first macro set:
>>
>> ***Cancer
>>
>> local ICD2 "Diagnosis1 Diagnosis2 Diagnosis3 Diagnosis4 Diagnosis5"
>> foreach X of varlist `ICD2' {
>> replace cancer =1 if inlist(`X',"150","151" "157" "162" "183" "191"
>> "196" "197" "198" "199" "200" "208")
>> }
>>
>> local PMT2 "Diagnosis_PMT_A_1 Diagnosis_PMT_A_2 Diagnosis_PMT_B_1
>> Diagnosis_PMT_B_2 Diagnosis_PMT_C_1 Diagnosis_PMT_C_2"
>>
>> foreach X of varlist `PMT2' {
>> replace cancer =1 if inlist(`X',"150","151" "157" "162" "183" "191"
>> "196" "197" "198" "199" "200" "208")
>> }
>>
>>
>> The second macro set:
>>
>> gen DIAG_1 = Diagnosis1
>> gen DIAG_2 = Diagnosis2
>> gen DIAG_3 = Diagnosis3
>> gen DIAG_4 = Diagnosis4
>> gen DIAG_5 = Diagnosis5
>>
>> gen ALT_A_1 = Diagnosis_PMT_A_1
>> gen ALT_A_2 = Diagnosis_PMT_A_2
>> gen ALT_B_1 = Diagnosis_PMT_B_1
>> gen ALT_B_2 = Diagnosis_PMT_B_2
>> gen ALT_C_1 = Diagnosis_PMT_C_1
>> gen ALT_C_2 = Diagnosis_PMT_C_2
>> ***Cancer
>>
>> forval j = 1/5 {
>> replace cancer=1 ///
>> if inlist(DIAG_`j',"150","151", "157", "162", "183","191",
>> "196", "197" "198" "199" "200" "208")
>> }
>>
>> local letter "A B C"
>> foreach i in `letter' {
>> forval e = 1/2 {
>> replace cancer=1 ///
>> if (inlist(ALT_`i'_`e',"150","151" "157" "162" "183" "191"
>> "196" "197" "198" "199" "200" "208")
>> }
>> }
>> }
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Will
>>
>> --
>> William J. Sankey
>> Johns Hopkins University
>> MA Public Policy '12
>> *
>> * 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/
*
* 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/