Dear Statalist,
I deal with choice data. Briefly, each respondent made 8 choices from 2 alternatives described by 7 attributes.
I was used to perform mixed logit models with the -mixlogit- command and its extensions from Arne Risa Hole. I'm exploring now the capabilities of the -cm- package available since Stata 16 which allows to specify case-specific variables and to deal with all the margins features.
I have two concerns. The first is that Stata doesn't provide the p-values of the SD of random coefficients, while it provides SE and confidence interval. I know it is possible to retrieve p-values but i am not comfortable with the computation. Does anyone know what it is exactly the formula to retrieve p-values?
My second concern is about the use of the -scalemetric(unconstrained)- option. If I had well understood, it allows to deal with SD coefficients near to zero when facing convergence issues. When specifying this option, convergence is indeed easier. However, the estimation gives negative SD coefficients and reports only the standard error (and not the confidence interval). Is it correct to interpret the negative SD coefficients as being positive like when using the -mixlogit- command?
Thanks all for your help.
Best regards,
Gabin
I deal with choice data. Briefly, each respondent made 8 choices from 2 alternatives described by 7 attributes.
I was used to perform mixed logit models with the -mixlogit- command and its extensions from Arne Risa Hole. I'm exploring now the capabilities of the -cm- package available since Stata 16 which allows to specify case-specific variables and to deal with all the margins features.
I have two concerns. The first is that Stata doesn't provide the p-values of the SD of random coefficients, while it provides SE and confidence interval. I know it is possible to retrieve p-values but i am not comfortable with the computation. Does anyone know what it is exactly the formula to retrieve p-values?
My second concern is about the use of the -scalemetric(unconstrained)- option. If I had well understood, it allows to deal with SD coefficients near to zero when facing convergence issues. When specifying this option, convergence is indeed easier. However, the estimation gives negative SD coefficients and reports only the standard error (and not the confidence interval). Is it correct to interpret the negative SD coefficients as being positive like when using the -mixlogit- command?
HTML Code:
Iteration 40: Log simulated-likelihood = -1326.5941 Mixed logit choice model Number of obs = 4,800 Number of cases = 2,400 Panel variable: id Number of panels = 300 Time variable: choice_~t Cases per panel: min = 8 avg = 8.0 max = 8 Alternatives variable: alt Alts per case: min = 2 avg = 2.0 max = 2 Integration sequence: random Integration points: 500 Wald chi2(17) = 127.71 Log simulated-likelihood = -1326.5941 Prob > chi2 = 0.0000 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- choice | Coefficient Std. err. z P>|z| [95% conf. interval] ---------------------------------------------------------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- alt | x7 | -.0213756 .0020901 -10.23 0.000 -.0254721 -.017279 | x1 | By phone | -1.086934 .1312381 -8.28 0.000 -1.344156 -.8297121 By video conference | -1.152181 .1411492 -8.16 0.000 -1.428828 -.8755332 | x2 | Mental health issue | -.3057931 .1168033 -2.62 0.009 -.5347232 -.0768629 Sexual and/or reproductive health issue | -.385047 .1204 -3.20 0.001 -.6210266 -.1490675 | x3 | Complex health issue | .1011919 .1443635 0.70 0.483 -.1817554 .3841391 Severe health issue | -.0175904 .1441243 -0.12 0.903 -.3000689 .264888 Urgent health issue | .128744 .1486268 0.87 0.386 -.1625591 .420047 Known health issue | .2281683 .1475545 1.55 0.122 -.0610332 .5173699 | x4 | I don't know the GP, but he/she has access to my EHR | -.3771844 .101947 -3.70 0.000 -.5769967 -.177372 I don't know the GP, and he/she doesn't have access to my EHR | -.6299359 .1076078 -5.85 0.000 -.8408433 -.4190286 | x5 | In two to seven days | -.3809516 .1001519 -3.80 0.000 -.5772457 -.1846575 In more than a week | -.8250788 .1235866 -6.68 0.000 -1.067304 -.5828534 | x6 | 1 hour | -.322185 .1377035 -2.34 0.019 -.592079 -.052291 1.5 hour | -.2368458 .1318407 -1.80 0.072 -.4952489 .0215572 2 hours | -.4732087 .1367653 -3.46 0.001 -.7412637 -.2051537 2.5 hours | -.6738228 .1373968 -4.90 0.000 -.9431157 -.4045299 ---------------------------------------------------------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- /Normal | sd(1.x1)| 0 (constrained) sd(2.x1)| .5916916 .1857062 .3198456 1.094587 sd(3.x1)| .8866804 .1653294 .615252 1.277854 sd(1.x2)| .3151563 .2694063 .0590052 1.683301 sd(2.x2)| 0 (constrained) sd(3.x2)| .7422964 .2150186 .4207388 1.309611 sd(1.x3)| 0 (constrained) sd(2.x3)| .2994315 .3213727 .0365362 2.453985 sd(3.x3)| .010682 .304374 5.95e-27 1.92e+22 sd(4.x3)| .726889 .2805639 .3411318 1.548867 sd(5.x3)| .8936325 .2381556 .5300432 1.50663 sd(1.x4)| 0 (constrained) sd(2.x4)| .3392724 .2398949 .0848546 1.356506 sd(3.x4)| .4499961 .2099579 .1803257 1.122949 sd(1.x5)| 0 (constrained) sd(2.x5)| .5086415 .2018011 .2337232 1.106934 sd(3.x5)| .8542586 .1614395 .589831 1.237232 sd(1.x6)| 0 (constrained) sd(2.x6)| .6745947 .2843739 .295271 1.541221 sd(3.x6)| .0225365 .9279188 2.02e-37 2.51e+33 sd(4.x6)| .5246342 .3119133 .1636016 1.682386 sd(5.x6)| .2619938 .4311212 .0104137 6.591387 ---------------------------------------------------------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- 1 | (base alternative) ---------------------------------------------------------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- 2 | _cons | -.0786649 .0702224 -1.12 0.263 -.2162982 .0589684 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks all for your help.
Best regards,
Gabin
Comment