The purpose of this workshop is to explore some issues in the analysis of survey data using Stata 15. Before we begin, you will want to be sure that your copy of Stata is up-to-date. To do this, please type

update all

in the Stata command window and follow any instructions given. These updates include not only fixes to known bugs, but also add some new features that may be useful. I am using Stata 15.1.

Before we begin looking at examples in Stata, we will quickly review some basic issues and concepts in survey data analysis.

NOTE: Most of the commands in this seminar will work with Stata versions 12-14.

## Why do we need survey data analysis software?

Regular statistical software (that is not designed for survey data) analyzes data as if the data were collected using simple random sampling. For experimental and quasi-experimental designs, this is exactly what we want. However, very few surveys use a simple random sample to collect data. Not only is it nearly impossible to do so, but it is not as efficient (either financially and statistically) as other sampling methods. When any sampling method other than simple random sampling is used, we usually need to use survey data analysis software to take into account the differences between the design that was used to collect the data and simple random sampling. This is because the sampling design affects both the calculation of the point estimates and the standard errors of those estimates. If you ignore the sampling design, e.g., if you assume simple random sampling when another type of sampling design was used, both the point estimates and their standard errors will likely be calculated incorrectly. The sampling weight will affect the calculation of the point estimate, and the stratification and/or clustering will affect the calculation of the standard errors. Ignoring the clustering will likely lead to standard errors that are underestimated, possibly leading to results that seem to be statistically significant, when in fact, they are not. The difference in point estimates and standard errors obtained using non-survey software and survey software with the design properly specified will vary from data set to data set, and even between analyses using the same data set. While it may be possible to get reasonably accurate results using non-survey software, there is no practical way to know beforehand how far off the results from non-survey software will be.

## Sampling designs

Most people do not conduct their own surveys. Rather, they use survey data that some agency or company collected and made available to the public. The documentation must be read carefully to find out what kind of sampling design was used to collect the data. This is very important because many of the estimates and standard errors are calculated differently for the different sampling designs. Hence, if you mis-specify the sampling design, the point estimates and standard errors will likely be wrong.

Below are some common features of many sampling designs.

__Sampling weights__: There are several types of weights that
can be associated with a survey. Perhaps the most common is the sampling weight.
A sampling weight is a probability weight that has had one or more adjustments
made to it. Both a sampling weight and a probability weight are used to weight the sample back to the population from which the sample
was drawn. By definition, a probability weight is the inverse of the probability of being included in the
sample due to the sampling design (except for a certainty PSU, see below).
The probability weight, called a *pweight* in Stata, is calculated as N/n, where N = the number of elements in the
population and n = the number of elements in the sample. For example, if a population has 10
elements and 3 are sampled at random with replacement, then the probability weight would be
10/3 = 3.33. In a two-stage design, the probability weight is calculated as f_{1}f_{2},
which means that the inverse of the sampling fraction for the first stage is
multiplied by the inverse of the sampling fraction for the second stage.
Under many sampling plans, the sum of the probability weights will equal the population total.

While many textbooks will end their discussion of probability weights here, this definition does not fully describe the sampling weights that are included with actual survey data sets. Rather, the sampling weight, which is sometimes called a “final weight,” starts with the inverse of the sampling fraction, but then incorporates several other values, such as corrections for unit non-response, errors in the sampling frame (sometimes called non-coverage), and poststratification. Because these other values are included in the probability weight that is included with the data set, it is often inadvisable to modify the sampling weights, such as trying to standardize them for a particular variable, e.g., age.

__PSU__: This is the **p**rimary **s**ampling **u**nit.
This is the first unit that is sampled in the design. For example, school
districts from California may be sampled and then schools within districts may
be sampled. The school district would be the PSU. If states from the US were sampled, and then school districts from within each
state, and then schools from within each district, then states would be the PSU.
One does not need to use the same sampling method at all levels of sampling.
For example, probability-proportional-to-size sampling may be used at
level 1 (to select states), while cluster sampling is used at level 2
(to select school districts). In the case of a simple random sample, the
PSUs and the elementary units are the same. In general, accounting for the
clustering in the data (i.e., using the PSUs), will increase the standard errors
of the point estimates. Conversely, ignoring the PSUs will tend to yield
standard errors that are too small, leading to false positives when doing
significance tests.

__Strata__: Stratification is a method of breaking up the
population into different groups, often by demographic variables such as gender,
race or SES. Each element in the population must belong to one, and only
one, strata. Once the strata have been defined, samples are taken from each
stratum as if it were independent of all of the other strata. For example,
if a sample is to be stratified on gender, men and women would be sampled
independently of one another. This means that the probability weights for men will
likely be different from the probability weights for the women. In most cases, you
need to have two or more PSUs in each stratum. The purpose of
stratification is to reduce the standard error of the estimates, and stratification works most
effectively when the variance of the dependent variable is smaller within the
strata than in the sample as a whole.

__FPC__: This is the **f**inite **p**opulation **c**orrection.
This is used when the sampling fraction (the number of elements or respondents
sampled relative to the population) becomes large. The FPC is used in the
calculation of the standard error of the estimate. If the value of the FPC
is close to 1, it will have little impact and can be safely ignored. In
some survey data analysis programs, such as SUDAAN, this information will be
needed if you specify that the data were collected without replacement
(see below for a definition of “without replacement”). The
formula for calculating the FPC is ((N-n)/(N-1))^{1/2}, where N is the
number of elements in the population and n is the number of elements in the
sample. To see the impact of the FPC for
samples of various proportions, suppose that you had
a population of 10,000 elements.

Sample size (n) FPC 1 1.0000 10 .9995 100 .9950 500 .9747 1000 .9487 5000 .7071 9000 .3162

__Replicate weights__: Replicate weights are a series of weight
variables that are used to correct the standard errors for the sampling plan.
They serve the same function as the PSU and strata variables (which are used a Taylor series
linearization) to correct the standard errors of the estimates for the sampling
design. Many public use data sets are now being released with
replicate weights instead of PSUs and strata in an effort to more securely
protect the identity of the respondents. In theory, the same standard
errors will be obtained using either the PSU and strata or the replicate
weights. There are different ways of creating replicate weights; the
method used is determined by the sampling plan. The most common are
balanced repeated and jackknife replicate weights. You will need to read
the documentation for the survey data set carefully to learn what type of
replicate weight is included in the data set; specifying the wrong type of
replicate weight will likely lead to incorrect standard errors. For more
information on replicate weights, please see
Stata
Library: Replicate Weights and Appendix D of the
WesVar Manual
by Westat, Inc. Several statistical packages, including Stata, SAS, SUDAAN, WesVar and R, allow the use of replicate weights.

## Consequences of not using the design elements

Sampling design elements include the sampling weights, post-stratification weights (if provided), PSUs, strata, and replicate weights. Rarely are all of these elements included in a single public-use data set. However, ignoring the design elements that are included can often lead to inaccurate point estimates and/or inaccurate standard errors.

## Sampling with and without replacement

Most samples collected in the real world are collected “without replacement”. This means that once a respondent has been selected to be in the sample and has participated in the survey, that particular respondent cannot be selected again to be in the sample. Many of the calculations change depending on if a sample is collected with or without replacement. Hence, programs like SUDAAN request that you specify if a survey sampling design was implemented with our without replacement, and an FPC is used if sampling without replacement is used, even if the value of the FPC is very close to one.

## Examples

For the examples in this workshop, we will use the data set from NHANES
2011-2012. The data set and documentation can be downloaded from
the NHANES
web site. The data files can be downloaded as SAS.xpt files. Files in this
format can be read directly into Stata using the **fdause** command.

## Reading the documentation

The first step in analyzing any survey data set is to read the documentation. With many of the public use data sets, the documentation can be quite extensive and sometimes even intimidating. Instead of trying to read the documentation “cover to cover”, there are some parts you will want to focus on. First, read the Introduction. This is usually an “easy read” and will orient you to the survey. There is usually a section or chapter called something like “Sample Design and Analysis Guidelines”, “Variance Estimation”, etc. This is the part that tells you about the design elements included with the survey and how to use them. Some even give example code. If multiple sampling weights have been included in the data set, there will be some instruction about when to use which one. If there is a section or chapter on missing data or imputation, please read that. This will tell you how missing data were handled. You should also read any documentation regarding the specific variables that you intend to use. As we will see little later on, we will need to look at the documentation to get the value labels for the variables. This is especially important because some of the values are actually missing data codes, and you need to do something so that Stata doesn’t treat those as valid values (or you will get some very “interesting” means, totals, etc.).

## Getting the data into Stata

The following commands can be used to open the NHANES data in Stata and save them in Stata format. I have also sorted the data before saving them (because I will merge the files), but this is not technically necessary.

* demographicsclear fdause "D:\Data\Seminars\Applied Survey Stata 15\demo_g.xpt" sort seqn save "D:\Data\Seminars\Applied Survey Stata 15\demo_g", replace

The do-file that imports the data, merges the files and recodes the variables can be found here. More variables are recoded in the do-file than are used in this presentation.

## The variables

We will use about a dozen different variables in the examples in this workshop. Below is a brief summary of them. Some of the variables have been recoded to be binary variables (values of 2 recoded to a value of 0). The count of missing observations includes values truly missing as well as refused and don’t know.

**ridageyr** – Age in years at exam – recoded; range of values: 0 –
79 are actual values, 80 = 80+ years of age

**pad630** – How much time do you spend doing moderate-intensity
activities on a type work day?; range of values: 10-960, 7053 missing
observations

**hsq496** – During the past 30 days, for about how many days have you
felt worried, tense or anxious?; range of values: 0-30; 3073 missing
observations

**female** – Recode of the variable riagendr; 0 = male, 1 = female; no
missing observations

**dmdborn4** – Country of birth; 1 = born in the United States, 0 =
otherwise; 5 missing observations

**dmdmartl** – Marital status; 1 = married, 2 = widowed, 3 = divorced, 4 =
separated, 5 = never married, 6 = living with partner; 4203 missing observations

**dmdeduc2** – Education level of adults aged 20+ years; 1 = less than 9th
grade, 2 = 9-11th grade, 3 = high school graduate, GED or equivalent, 4 = some
college or AA degree, 5 = college graduate or above; 4201 missing observations

**pad675** – How much time do you spend doing moderate-intensity sports,
fitness, or recreation activities on a typical day?; range of values: 10-600;
6220 missing observations

**hsq571** – During the past 12 months, have you donated blood?; 0 = no, 1
= yes; 3673 missing observations

**pad680** – How much time do you usually spend sitting on a typical day?;
range of values: 0-1380; 2365 missing observations

**paq665** – Do you do any moderate-intensity sports, fitness or
recreational activities that cause a small increase in breathing or heart rate
at least 10 minutes continually?; 0 = no, 1 = yes; 2329 missing observations

**hsd010** – Would you say that your general health is…; 1 = excellent,
2 = very good, 3 = good, 4 = fair, 5 = poor; 3064 missing observations

### The svyset command

Before we can start our analyses, we need to issue the **
svyset** command. The **svyset** command tells Stata about the design
elements in the survey. Once this command has been issued, all you need to
do for your analyses is use the **svy:** prefix before each command.
Because the 2011-2012 NHANES data were released with a sampling weight (**wtint2yr**), a PSU
variable (**sdmvpsu**) and a strata variable (**sdmvstra**), we will use these our **svyset** command. The **svyset** command looks like this:

use "D:\Data\Seminars\Applied Survey Stata 15\nhanes2012_merged", clear svyset sdmvpsu [pw = wtint2yr], strata(sdmvstra) singleunit(centered)pweight: wtint2yr VCE: linearized Single unit: centered Strata 1: sdmvstra SU 1: sdmvpsu FPC 1: <zero>

The **singleunit** option was added in Stata 10. This option allows for
different ways of handling a single PSU in a stratum. If you use the
default option, **missing**, then you will get no standard errors when Stata
encounters a single PSU in a stratum. This can happen as a result of
missing data or running an analysis on a subpopulation. There are three other options.
One is **certainty**, meaning that the singleton PSUs be treated as certainty
PSUs; certainty PSUs are PSUs that were selected into the sample with a
probability of 1 (in other words, these PSUs were certain to be in the sample)
and do not contribute to the standard error. The **scaled** option
gives a scaled version of the **certainty** option. The scaling factor comes
from using the average of the variances from the strata with multiple sampling
units for each stratum with one PSU. The **centered** option centers
strata with one sampling unit at the grand mean instead of the stratum mean.
Now that we have issued the **svyset** command, we can use the **svydescribe**
command to get information on the strata and PSUs.

svydescribeSurvey: Describing stage 1 sampling units pweight: wtint2yr VCE: linearized Single unit: centered Strata 1: sdmvstra SU 1: sdmvpsu FPC 1: <zero> #Obs per Unit ---------------------------- Stratum #Units #Obs min mean max -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- 90 3 862 233 287.3 351 91 3 998 309 332.7 356 92 3 875 244 291.7 328 93 2 602 276 301.0 326 94 2 688 322 344.0 366 95 2 722 348 361.0 374 96 2 676 336 338.0 340 97 2 608 292 304.0 316 98 2 708 320 354.0 388 99 2 682 320 341.0 362 100 2 700 343 350.0 357 101 2 715 357 357.5 358 102 2 624 270 312.0 354 103 2 296 140 148.0 156 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- 14 31 9756 140 314.7 388

The output above tells us that there are 14 strata with two or three PSUs in each. There are 31 PSUs. There are a different number of observations in each PSU and in each strata. There are a minimum of140 observations, a maximum of 388 observations and an average of 315 observations in the PSUs.

### Descriptive statistics

We will start by calculating some descriptive statistics of some of the
continuous variables. We can use the **svy: mean** command to get the
mean of continuous variables, and we can follow that command with the **estat
sd** command to get the standard deviation or variance of the variable.

svy: mean ridageyr(running mean on estimation sample) Survey: Mean estimation Number of strata = 14 Number of obs = 9756 Number of PSUs = 31 Population size = 306590681 Design df = 17 -------------------------------------------------------------- | Linearized | Mean Std. Err. [95% Conf. Interval] -------------+------------------------------------------------ ridageyr | 37.18519 .6964767 35.71576 38.65463 --------------------------------------------------------------estat sd------------------------------------- | Mean Std. Dev. -------------+----------------------- ridageyr | 37.18519 22.36971 -------------------------------------estat sd, var------------------------------------- | Mean Variance -------------+----------------------- ridageyr | 37.18519 500.4039 ------------------------------------- * pad630 = How much time do you spend doing moderate-intensity activities on a type work day?svy: mean pad630(running mean on estimation sample) Survey: Mean estimation Number of strata = 14 Number of obs = 2054 Number of PSUs = 31 Population size = 88768571 Design df = 17 -------------------------------------------------------------- | Linearized | Mean Std. Err. [95% Conf. Interval] -------------+------------------------------------------------ pad630 | 139.8874 5.57906 128.1166 151.6582 -------------------------------------------------------------- * hsq496 = During the past 30 days, for about how many days have you felt worried, tense or anxious?svy: mean hsq496(running mean on estimation sample) Survey: Mean estimation Number of strata = 14 Number of obs = 5883 Number of PSUs = 31 Population size = 225667462 Design df = 17 -------------------------------------------------------------- | Linearized | Mean Std. Err. [95% Conf. Interval] -------------+------------------------------------------------ hsq496 | 5.383908 .1899507 4.983147 5.784669 --------------------------------------------------------------

Notice that a different number of observations were used in each analysis.
This is important, because if you use these three variables in the same call to
**svy: mean**, you will get different estimates of the means for each of the
variables. This is because both **pad630** and **hsq496** have
missing values. However, these variables are not missing on the same
observations: Both **pad630** and **hsq496** are missing on the same 3666
observations, but **pad630** has missing values on an additional 4036
observations, and **hsq496** has missing values on 207 observations.
There are only 1847 observations that have valid values for all three variables,
and those are used in the calculations of the means when all of the variables
are used in the same call to **svy: mean**.

svy: mean ridageyr pad630 hsq496(running mean on estimation sample) Survey: Mean estimation Number of strata = 14 Number of obs = 1847 Number of PSUs = 31 Population size = 81681482 Design df = 17 -------------------------------------------------------------- | Linearized | Mean Std. Err. [95% Conf. Interval] -------------+------------------------------------------------ ridageyr | 41.97793 .8211706 40.24541 43.71045 pad630 | 139.7228 5.713696 127.668 151.7777 hsq496 | 5.37395 .2781225 4.787162 5.960737 --------------------------------------------------------------

Let’s get some descriptive statistics on some
of the binary variables, such as **female**
and **dmdborn4**.

svy: mean female(running mean on estimation sample) Survey: Mean estimation Number of strata = 14 Number of obs = 9756 Number of PSUs = 31 Population size = 306590681 Design df = 17 -------------------------------------------------------------- | Linearized | Mean Std. Err. [95% Conf. Interval] -------------+------------------------------------------------ female | .5119524 .0064398 .4983657 .5255392 --------------------------------------------------------------estat sd------------------------------------- | Mean Std. Dev. -------------+----------------------- female | .5119524 .4998827 -------------------------------------svy: mean dmdborn4(running mean on estimation sample) Survey: Mean estimation Number of strata = 14 Number of obs = 9751 Number of PSUs = 31 Population size = 306485936 Design df = 17 -------------------------------------------------------------- | Linearized | Mean Std. Err. [95% Conf. Interval] -------------+------------------------------------------------ dmdborn4 | .8499362 .0157561 .8166938 .8831787 --------------------------------------------------------------estat sd------------------------------------- | Mean Std. Dev. -------------+----------------------- dmdborn4 | .8499362 .3571522 -------------------------------------

Taking the mean of a variable that is coded 0/1 gives the proportion of 1s. The output above indicates that approximately 51.2% of the observations in our data set are from females; 84.99% of respondents were born in the United States.

Of course, the **svy: tab** command can also be used with binary
variables. The proportion of .512 matches the .5119524 that we found with
the **svy: mean** command.

svy: tab female(running tabulate on estimation sample) Number of strata = 14 Number of obs = 9756 Number of PSUs = 31 Population size = 306590681 Design df = 17 ----------------------- RECODE of | riagendr | (Gender) | proportions ----------+------------ male | .488 female | .512 | Total | 1 ----------------------- Key: proportions = cell proportions

By default, **svy: tab** gives proportions. If you would prefer to
see the actual counts, you will need to use the **count** option.
Oftentimes, the counts are too large for the display space in the table, so
other options, such **cellwidth** and **format** need to be used to
display the counts. The **missing** option is often useful if the
variable has any missing values (the variable **female** does not).

svy: tab female, missing count cellwidth(15) format(%15.2g)(running tabulate on estimation sample) Number of strata = 14 Number of obs = 9756 Number of PSUs = 31 Population size = 306590681 Design df = 17 --------------------------- RECODE of | riagendr | (Gender) | count ----------+---------------- male | 149630839 female | 156959842 | Total | 306590681 --------------------------- Key: count = weighted countssvy: tab female dmdborn4, missing count cellwidth(15) format(%15.2g)(running tabulate on estimation sample) Number of strata = 14 Number of obs = 9756 Number of PSUs = 31 Population size = 306590681 Design df = 17 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ RECODE of | riagendr | Country of birth - recode (Gender) | born elsewhere born in US . Total ----------+------------------------------------------------------------------- male | 22449131 127102676 79032 149630839 female | 23543299 133390830 25713 156959842 | Total | 45992430 260493506 104745 306590681 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Key: weighted counts Pearson: Uncorrected chi2(2) = 0.9477 Design-based F(1.78, 30.34) = 0.5244 P = 0.5769

Using the **col** option with **svy: tab** will give the column
proportions. As you can see, the values in the column “Total” are the same
as those from **svy: tab female**.

svy: tab female dmdborn4, col(running tabulate on estimation sample) Number of strata = 14 Number of obs = 9751 Number of PSUs = 31 Population size = 306485936 Design df = 17 ---------------------------------------- RECODE of | riagendr | Country of birth - recode (Gender) | born els born in Total ----------+----------------------------- male | .4881 .4879 .488 female | .5119 .5121 .512 | Total | 1 1 1 ---------------------------------------- Key: column proportions Pearson: Uncorrected chi2(1) = 0.0002 Design-based F(1, 17) = 0.0002 P = 0.9891

Of course, the **svy: proportion** command can also be used to get
proportions.

svy: proportion female(running proportion on estimation sample) Survey: Proportion estimation Number of strata = 14 Number of obs = 9756 Number of PSUs = 31 Population size = 306590681 Design df = 17 -------------------------------------------------------------- | Linearized | Proportion Std. Err. [95% Conf. Interval] -------------+------------------------------------------------ female | male | .4880476 .0064398 .474473 .5016398 female | .5119524 .0064398 .4983602 .525527 --------------------------------------------------------------

Using the **estat** command after the **svy: mean** command also allows
you to get the design effects, misspecification effects, unweighted and weighted
sample sizes, or the coefficient of variation. The Deff and the Deft are types of design
effects, which tell you about the efficiency of your sample. The Deff is a
ratio of two variances. In the numerator we have the variance estimate
from the current sample (including all of its design elements), and in the
denominator we have the variance from a hypothetical sample of the same size
drawn as an SRS. In other words, the Deff tells you how efficient your
sample is compared to an SRS of equal size. If the Deff is less than 1,
your sample is more efficient than SRS; usually the Deff is greater than 1.
The Deft is the ratio of two standard error estimates. Again, the
numerator is the standard error estimate from the current sample. The
denominator is a hypothetical SRS (with replacement) standard error from a
sample of the same size as the current sample. You can also use the **meff** and the
**meft** option to get the misspecification effects.
Misspecification effects are a ratio of the variance estimate from the current
analysis to a hypothetical variance estimated from a misspecified model.
Please see the Stata documentation for more details on how these are calculated.
The coefficient of variation is the ratio of the standard error to the mean,
multiplied by 100% (see page 36 of the Stata 15 svy manual). It is an
indication of the variability relative to the mean in the population and is not
affected by the unit of measurement of the variable.

svy: mean ridageyr(running mean on estimation sample) Survey: Mean estimation Number of strata = 14 Number of obs = 9756 Number of PSUs = 31 Population size = 306590681 Design df = 17 -------------------------------------------------------------- | Linearized | Mean Std. Err. [95% Conf. Interval] -------------+------------------------------------------------ ridageyr | 37.18519 .6964767 35.71576 38.65463 --------------------------------------------------------------estat effects---------------------------------------------------------- | Linearized | Mean Std. Err. DEFF DEFT -------------+-------------------------------------------- ridageyr | 37.18519 .6964767 9.45724 3.07526 ----------------------------------------------------------estat effects, deff deft meff meft------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | Linearized | Mean Std. Err. DEFF DEFT MEFF MEFT -------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- ridageyr | 37.18519 .6964767 9.45724 3.07526 7.83352 2.79884 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------estat size---------------------------------------------------------------------- | Linearized | Mean Std. Err. Obs Size -------------+-------------------------------------------------------- ridageyr | 37.18519 .6964767 9756 306590680.995 ----------------------------------------------------------------------estat cv------------------------------------------------ | Linearized | Mean Std. Err. CV (%) -------------+---------------------------------- ridageyr | 37.18519 .6964767 1.87299 ------------------------------------------------display (.6964767/37.18519)*1001.8729949

### Analysis of subpopulations

Before we continue with our descriptive statistics, we should pause to
discuss the analysis of subpopulations. The analysis of subpopulations is one place where survey data and
experimental data are quite different. If you have data from an experiment
(or quasi-experiment), and you want to analyze the responses from, say, just the
women, or just people over age 50, you can just delete the unwanted cases from
the data set or use the **by:** prefix. Survey data are different.
With survey data, you (almost) never get to delete any cases from the data set,
even if you will never use them in any of your analyses. Because of the
way the **-by-** prefix works, you usually don’t use it with survey data
either. Instead, Stata has provided two options that allow you to
correctly analyze subpopulations of your survey data. These options are **
subpop** and **over**. The **subpop** option is sort of like
deleting unwanted cases (without really deleting them, of course), and the **
over** option is very similar to **-by-** processing. We will start
with some examples of the **subpop** option.

First, however, let’s take a second to see why deleting cases from a survey data
set can be so problematic. If the data set is subset (meaning that
observations not to be included in the subpopulation are deleted from the data
set), the standard errors of the estimates cannot be calculated correctly. When
the subpopulation option(s) is used, only the cases defined by the subpopulation
are used in the calculation of the estimate, but all cases are used in the
calculation of the standard errors. For more information on this issue, please
see
Sampling Techniques, Third Edition by William G. Cochran (1977) and
Small Area Estimation by J. N. K. Rao (2003). Also, if you look in the
Stata 15 svy manual, you will find an entire section (pages 67-72) dedicated
to the analysis of subpopulations. The formulas for using both **if**
and **subpop** are given, along with an explanation of how they are
different. If you look at the help for any **svy:** command, you will
see the same warning:

Warning: Use of if or in restrictions will not produce correct variance estimates for subpopulations in many cases. To compute estimates for subpopulations, use the subpop() option. The full specification for subpop() is subpop([varname] [if])

The **subpop** option on the **svy:** prefix is used with binary
variables. (Technically, all cases coded as not 0 and not missing are part
of the subpopulation; this means that if your subpopulation variable has values
of 1 and 2, all of the observations will be included in the subpopulation unless
you use a different syntax.) You may need to create a binary variable
(using the **generate** command) in which all of the observations be to
included in the subpopulation are coded as 1 and all other observations are
coded as 0. For our example, we will use the variable **female** for
our subpopulation variable, so that only females will be included in calculation
of the point estimate.

svy: mean ridageyr(running mean on estimation sample) Survey: Mean estimation Number of strata = 14 Number of obs = 9756 Number of PSUs = 31 Population size = 306590681 Design df = 17 -------------------------------------------------------------- | Linearized | Mean Std. Err. [95% Conf. Interval] -------------+------------------------------------------------ ridageyr | 37.18519 .6964767 35.71576 38.65463 --------------------------------------------------------------svy, subpop(female): mean ridageyr(running mean on estimation sample) Survey: Mean estimation Number of strata = 14 Number of obs = 9756 Number of PSUs = 31 Population size = 306590681 Subpop. no. obs = 4900 Subpop. size = 156959842 Design df = 17 -------------------------------------------------------------- | Linearized | Mean Std. Err. [95% Conf. Interval] -------------+------------------------------------------------ ridageyr | 38.09657 .6713502 36.68014 39.51299 --------------------------------------------------------------

To get the mean for the males, we can specify the subpopulation as the
variable **female** not equal to 1 (meaning the observations that are coded
0).

svy, subpop(if female != 1): mean ridageyr(running mean on estimation sample) Survey: Mean estimation Number of strata = 14 Number of obs = 9756 Number of PSUs = 31 Population size = 306590681 Subpop. no. obs = 4856 Subpop. size = 149630839 Design df = 17 -------------------------------------------------------------- | Linearized | Mean Std. Err. [95% Conf. Interval] -------------+------------------------------------------------ ridageyr | 36.22918 .8431945 34.4502 38.00817 --------------------------------------------------------------

We can also use the **over** option, which will give the results for each
level of the categorical variable listed. The **over** option is available only for **svy: mean**, **svy: proportion**,
**svy: ratio** and **svy: total**.

svy, over(female): mean ridageyr(running mean on estimation sample) Survey: Mean estimation Number of strata = 14 Number of obs = 9756 Number of PSUs = 31 Population size = 306590681 Design df = 17 male: female = male female: female = female -------------------------------------------------------------- | Linearized Over | Mean Std. Err. [95% Conf. Interval] -------------+------------------------------------------------ ridageyr | male | 36.22918 .8431945 34.4502 38.00817 female | 38.09657 .6713502 36.68014 39.51299 --------------------------------------------------------------

We can include more than one variable with the **over** option; this will
give us results for every combination of the variables listed.

svy, over(dmdmartl female): mean pad630(running mean on estimation sample) Survey: Mean estimation Number of strata = 14 Number of obs = 1705 Number of PSUs = 31 Population size = 77846933 Design df = 17 Over: dmdmartl female _subpop_1: married male _subpop_2: married female _subpop_3: widowed male _subpop_4: widowed female _subpop_5: divorced male _subpop_6: divorced female _subpop_7: separated male _subpop_8: separated female _subpop_9: never married male _subpop_10: never married female _subpop_11: living with partner male _subpop_12: living with partner female -------------------------------------------------------------- | Linearized Over | Mean Std. Err. [95% Conf. Interval] -------------+------------------------------------------------ pad630 | _subpop_1 | 156.6941 8.765612 138.2002 175.1879 _subpop_2 | 118.6255 9.590405 98.39152 138.8595 _subpop_3 | 132.6111 20.77576 88.77813 176.4442 _subpop_4 | 120.9569 11.10439 97.52869 144.3851 _subpop_5 | 209.423 27.28619 151.8541 266.9918 _subpop_6 | 124.6343 15.50591 91.91973 157.3489 _subpop_7 | 187.9685 38.86106 105.9789 269.9582 _subpop_8 | 200.9333 52.49986 90.16828 311.6983 _subpop_9 | 146.4231 12.35329 120.3599 172.4862 _subpop_10 | 131.7091 13.30558 103.6368 159.7814 _subpop_11 | 201.422 13.41895 173.1105 229.7335 _subpop_12 | 122.5736 14.88511 91.16879 153.9785 --------------------------------------------------------------

We can also use the **subpop** option and the **over** option together.
In the example below, we get the mean of **pad630** for females in each
combination of **dmdmart1** and **dmdecuc2** (30 levels).

svy, subpop(female): mean pad630, over(dmdmartl dmdeduc2)(running mean on estimation sample) Survey: Mean estimation Number of strata = 14 Number of obs = 5619 Number of PSUs = 31 Population size = 185989071 Subpop. no. obs = 763 Subpop. size = 36358232.8 Design df = 17 Over: dmdmartl dmdeduc2 _subpop_1: married less than 9th grade _subpop_2: married no hs diploma _subpop_3: married hs grad or GED _subpop_4: married some college or AA degre _subpop_5: married college grad or above _subpop_6: widowed less than 9th grade _subpop_7: widowed no hs diploma _subpop_8: widowed hs grad or GED _subpop_9: widowed some college or AA degre _subpop_10: widowed college grad or above _subpop_11: divorced less than 9th grade _subpop_12: divorced no hs diploma _subpop_13: divorced hs grad or GED _subpop_14: divorced some college or AA degr _subpop_15: divorced college grad or above _subpop_16: separated less than 9th grade _subpop_17: separated no hs diploma _subpop_18: separated hs grad or GED _subpop_19: separated some college or AA deg _subpop_20: separated college grad or above _subpop_21: never married less than 9th grad _subpop_22: never married no hs diploma _subpop_23: never married hs grad or GED _subpop_24: never married some college or AA _subpop_25: never married college grad or ab _subpop_26: living with partner less than 9t _subpop_27: living with partner no hs diplom _subpop_28: living with partner hs grad or G _subpop_29: living with partner some college _subpop_30: living with partner college grad -------------------------------------------------------------- | Linearized Over | Mean Std. Err. [95% Conf. Interval] -------------+------------------------------------------------ pad630 | _subpop_1 | 123.1873 33.99413 51.46593 194.9086 _subpop_2 | 143.3616 14.00536 113.8129 172.9103 _subpop_3 | 111.808 12.92772 84.53291 139.0831 _subpop_4 | 146.2888 22.89246 97.98991 194.5877 _subpop_5 | 88.91933 8.30694 71.39322 106.4454 _subpop_6 | 176.0959 72.50964 23.11395 329.0779 _subpop_7 | 90.60535 17.21293 54.28923 126.9215 _subpop_8 | 110.4805 37.21189 31.97029 188.9907 _subpop_9 | 101.8385 11.74256 77.06389 126.6132 _subpop_10 | 260.9962 63.18704 127.6832 394.3092 _subpop_11 | 54.28887 15.49709 21.59287 86.98487 _subpop_12 | 163.2022 47.28731 63.43472 262.9697 _subpop_13 | 145.5074 25.43471 91.84482 199.1699 _subpop_14 | 129.5883 28.49053 69.47856 189.6981 _subpop_15 | 76.00663 11.32266 52.1179 99.89535 _subpop_16 | 169.3599 80.57609 -.6408196 339.3606 _subpop_17 | 165.8482 46.57393 67.58582 264.1106 _subpop_18 | 302.0225 117.2982 54.54487 549.5001 _subpop_19 | 142.5322 26.01105 87.65368 197.4107 _subpop_20 | 117.9216 34.79595 44.50859 191.3347 _subpop_21 | 309.9912 93.1523 113.4571 506.5254 _subpop_22 | 166.3335 46.45898 68.31357 264.3533 _subpop_23 | 190.2853 55.64751 72.87928 307.6913 _subpop_24 | 109.5492 15.62974 76.57336 142.5251 _subpop_25 | 126.5192 19.29269 85.81517 167.2232 _subpop_26 | 120 . . . _subpop_27 | 144.995 24.39718 93.5215 196.4686 _subpop_28 | 98.81543 21.16077 54.17012 143.4607 _subpop_29 | 152.5923 23.7468 102.4909 202.6936 _subpop_30 | 89.0113 23.17592 40.11439 137.9082 --------------------------------------------------------------

For subpopulation 26, no standard error or confidence intervals are given.
This may be cause there are very few observations at that level. To see if
this is the cause, we can use the **estat size** command. The
unweighted number of cases is given in the column titles “Obs”, and the weighted
(or estimated subpopulation size) is given in the column titled “Size”.

estat sizeOver: dmdmartl dmdeduc2 _subpop_1: married less than 9th grade _subpop_2: married no hs diploma _subpop_3: married hs grad or ged _subpop_4: married some college or AA degre _subpop_5: married college grad or above _subpop_6: widowed less than 9th grade _subpop_7: widowed no hs diploma _subpop_8: widowed hs grad or ged _subpop_9: widowed some college or AA degre _subpop_10: widowed college grad or above _subpop_11: divorced less than 9th grade _subpop_12: divorced no hs diplom _subpop_13: divorced hs grad or ged _subpop_14: divorced some college or AA degr _subpop_15: divorced college grad or above _subpop_16: separated less than 9th grade _subpop_17: separated no hs diploma _subpop_18: separated hs grad or ged _subpop_19: separated some college or AA deg _subpop_20: separated college grad or above _subpop_21: never married less than 9th grad _subpop_22: never married no hs diplom _subpop_23: never married hs grad or ged _subpop_24: never married some college or AA _subpop_25: never married college grad or ab _subpop_26: living with partner less than 9t _subpop_27: living with partner no hs diplom _subpop_28: living with partner hs grad or g _subpop_29: living with partner some college _subpop_30: living with partner college grad ---------------------------------------------------------------------- | Linearized Over | Mean Std. Err. Obs Size -------------+-------------------------------------------------------- pad630 | _subpop_1 | 123.1873 33.99413 14 282303.798783 _subpop_2 | 143.3616 14.00536 36 1493852.2679 _subpop_3 | 111.808 12.92772 60 2807704.21163 _subpop_4 | 146.2888 22.89246 121 7032757.93552 _subpop_5 | 88.91933 8.30694 116 7192028.73485 _subpop_6 | 176.0959 72.50964 5 111127.083356 _subpop_7 | 90.60535 17.21293 17 562709.323876 _subpop_8 | 110.4805 37.21189 15 596030.21488 _subpop_9 | 101.8385 11.74256 27 1272472.7973 _subpop_10 | 260.9962 63.18704 9 296513.579822 _subpop_11 | 54.28887 15.49709 3 78128.930803 _subpop_12 | 163.2022 47.28731 10 414794.852531 _subpop_13 | 145.5074 25.43471 23 1215808.11627 _subpop_14 | 129.5883 28.49053 39 1738510.76294 _subpop_15 | 76.00663 11.32266 14 914950.601057 _subpop_16 | 169.3599 80.57609 4 88739.706649 _subpop_17 | 165.8482 46.57393 10 262282.787221 _subpop_18 | 302.0225 117.2982 10 327045.836107 _subpop_19 | 142.5322 26.01105 10 247858.703249 _subpop_20 | 117.9216 34.79595 4 79284.608695 _subpop_21 | 309.9912 93.1523 4 104748.202272 _subpop_22 | 166.3335 46.45898 10 343955.585817 _subpop_23 | 190.2853 55.64751 19 748235.70547 _subpop_24 | 109.5492 15.62974 79 2939581.96271 _subpop_25 | 126.5192 19.29269 37 1786563.47803 _subpop_26 | 120 0 2 83816.117097 _subpop_27 | 144.995 24.39718 9 312110.74153 _subpop_28 | 98.81543 21.16077 17 872758.146424 _subpop_29 | 152.5923 23.7468 26 1355189.31349 _subpop_30 | 89.0113 23.17592 13 796368.717456 ----------------------------------------------------------------------list pad630 if female == 1 & dmdmartl == 6 & dmdeduc2 == 1+--------+ | pad630 | |--------| 344. | 120 | 479. | . | 1339. | . | 1962. | . | 1987. | 120 | |--------| 2075. | . | 2148. | . | 2178. | . | 2631. | . | 2972. | . | |--------| 3148. | . | 4118. | . | 4595. | . | 6610. | . | 7064. | . | |--------| 7112. | . | 7214. | . | 7709. | . | 7829. | . | 8095. | . | |--------| 8479. | . | +--------+

By using the **list** command, we can see that there are only two cases
that have a valid value for **pad630** in subpopulation 26, and both of those
values are 120. This is why no standard error can be estimated.

The **lincom** command can be used to make comparisons between
subpopulations. In the first example below, we will compare the means for
males and females for **hsq496** (number of days feeling anxious). We
can use the **display** command to see how the point estimate in the output
of the **lincom** command is calculated. The value of using the **
lincom** command is that the standard error of point estimate is also
calculated, as well as the test statistic, p-value and 95% confidence interval. In
the following examples, we will compare the mean number of days feeling anxious
between those who are married to those who are living with a partner, and those
who are married to those who are widowed. Please see page 120 of the Stata
15 svy manual (first example in the section on survey postestimation) for more
information on using **lincom** after the **svy, subpop(): mean** command.

* hsq496 = During the past 30 days, for about how many days have you felt worried, tense or anxious?svy, over(female): mean hsq496(running mean on estimation sample) Survey: Mean estimation Number of strata = 14 Number of obs = 5883 Number of PSUs = 31 Population size = 225667462 Design df = 17 male: female = male female: female = female -------------------------------------------------------------- | Linearized Over | Mean Std. Err. [95% Conf. Interval] -------------+------------------------------------------------ hsq496 | male | 4.589723 .1956524 4.176933 5.002514 female | 6.153479 .2675166 5.589069 6.71789 --------------------------------------------------------------lincom [hsq496]male - [hsq496]female( 1) [hsq496]male - [hsq496]female = 0 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mean | Coef. Std. Err. t P>|t| [95% Conf. Interval] -------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- (1) | -1.563756 .2702582 -5.79 0.000 -2.133951 -.9935614 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------display 4.589723 - 6.153479-1.563756svy, over(dmdmartl): mean hsq496(running mean on estimation sample) Survey: Mean estimation Number of strata = 14 Number of obs = 4692 Number of PSUs = 31 Population size = 193938169 Design df = 17 married: dmdmartl = married widowed: dmdmartl = widowed divorced: dmdmartl = divorced separated: dmdmartl = separated _subpop_5: dmdmartl = never married _subpop_6: dmdmartl = living with partner -------------------------------------------------------------- | Linearized Over | Mean Std. Err. [95% Conf. Interval] -------------+------------------------------------------------ hsq496 | married | 4.915051 .2864456 4.310704 5.519399 widowed | 5.450213 .3868792 4.633969 6.266457 divorced | 7.514127 .473958 6.514163 8.514091 separated | 7.231938 1.136924 4.833238 9.630637 _subpop_5 | 6.223865 .408766 5.361444 7.086286 _subpop_6 | 7.266146 .6322425 5.93223 8.600061 --------------------------------------------------------------lincom [hsq496]married - [hsq496]_subpop_6( 1) [hsq496]married - [hsq496]_subpop_6 = 0 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mean | Coef. Std. Err. t P>|t| [95% Conf. Interval] -------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- (1) | -2.351094 .6468052 -3.63 0.002 -3.715734 -.9864544 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------lincom [hsq496]married - [hsq496]widowed( 1) [hsq496]married - [hsq496]widowed = 0 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mean | Coef. Std. Err. t P>|t| [95% Conf. Interval] -------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- (1) | -.5351614 .5175658 -1.03 0.316 -1.62713 .5568069 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

### Graphing with continuous variables

We can also get some descriptive graphs of our variables. For a
continuous variable, you may want a histogram. However, the **histogram**
command will only accept a frequency weight, which, by definition, can have only
integer values. A suggestion by Heeringa, West and Berglund (2010, pages
121-122) is to simply use the integer part of the sampling weight. We can
create a frequency weight from our sampling weight using the **generate**
command with the **int** function.

gen int_wtint2yr = int(wtint2yr) histogram pad630 [fw = int_wtint2yr], bin(20)histogram ridageyr [fw = int_wtint2yr], bin(20) normal

We can make box plots and use the sampling weight that is provided in the data set.

* hsq496 = During the past 30 days, for about how many days have you felt worried, tense or anxious?graph box hsq496 [pw = wtint2yr]graph box hsq496 [pw = wtint2yr], by(female) ylabel(0(5)30)* the line in the box plot represents the median, not the meansvy, over(female): mean hsq496(running mean on estimation sample) Survey: Mean estimation Number of strata = 14 Number of obs = 5883 Number of PSUs = 31 Population size = 225667462 Design df = 17 male: female = male female: female = female -------------------------------------------------------------- | Linearized Over | Mean Std. Err. [95% Conf. Interval] -------------+------------------------------------------------ hsq496 | male | 4.589723 .1956524 4.176933 5.002514 female | 6.153479 .2675166 5.589069 6.71789 --------------------------------------------------------------estat sdmale: female = male female: female = female ------------------------------------- Over | Mean Std. Dev. -------------+----------------------- hsq496 | male | 4.589723 8.408553 female | 6.153479 9.096215 -------------------------------------

We can use the **svy: total** command to get totals. The values in
the output can get to be very large, so we can use the **estimates table**
command to see them. We can also use the **matrix list** command.

svy: total pad630(running total on estimation sample) Survey: Total estimation Number of strata = 14 Number of obs = 2054 Number of PSUs = 31 Population size = 88768571 Design df = 17 -------------------------------------------------------------- | Linearized | Total Std. Err. [95% Conf. Interval] -------------+------------------------------------------------ pad630 | 1.24e+10 1.07e+09 1.02e+10 1.47e+10 --------------------------------------------------------------estimates table, b(%15.2f) se(%13.2f)-------------------------------- Variable | active -------------+------------------ pad630 | 12417602483.56 | 1065724292.32 -------------------------------- legend: b/sesvy: total pad630(running total on estimation sample) Survey: Total estimation Number of strata = 14 Number of obs = 2054 Number of PSUs = 31 Population size = 88768571 Design df = 17 -------------------------------------------------------------- | Linearized | Total Std. Err. [95% Conf. Interval] -------------+------------------------------------------------ pad630 | 1.24e+10 1.07e+09 1.02e+10 1.47e+10 --------------------------------------------------------------matlist e(b), format(%15.2f)| pad630 -------------+----------------- y1 | 12417602483.56svy, over(female): total pad630(running total on estimation sample) Survey: Total estimation Number of strata = 14 Number of obs = 2054 Number of PSUs = 31 Population size = 88768571 Design df = 17 male: female = male female: female = female -------------------------------------------------------------- | Linearized Over | Total Std. Err. [95% Conf. Interval] -------------+------------------------------------------------ pad630 | male | 7.41e+09 6.37e+08 6.06e+09 8.75e+09 female | 5.01e+09 4.72e+08 4.01e+09 6.00e+09 --------------------------------------------------------------estimates table, b(%15.2f) se(%13.2f)-------------------------------- Variable | active -------------+------------------ male | 7408679626.25 | 637463721.35 female | 5008922857.30 | 472105366.03 -------------------------------- legend: b/se

### Relationships between two continuous variables

Let’s look at some bivariate relationships. As of Stata 15, we cannot get correlations with survey data (but you can with SUDAAN 11). The graphical version of a correlation is a scatterplot, which we show below. We will include the fit line.

svy: mean pad630 pad675(running mean on estimation sample) Survey: Mean estimation Number of strata = 14 Number of obs = 1030 Number of PSUs = 31 Population size = 48053490 Design df = 17 -------------------------------------------------------------- | Linearized | Mean Std. Err. [95% Conf. Interval] -------------+------------------------------------------------ pad630 | 129.7198 5.723011 117.6453 141.7943 pad675 | 72.48499 2.365431 67.49436 77.47561 --------------------------------------------------------------twoway (scatter pad630 pad675) (lfit pad630 pad675 [pw = wtint2yr]), /// title("minutes of moderate intensity work" /// "v. minutes of moderate recreational activities")

### Descriptive statistics with categorical variables

Let’s get some descriptive statistics with categorical variables. We
can use the **svy: tab** and **svy: proportion** commands. We will
use the marital status variable, **dmdmart1**, which has six levels.
When used with no options, the output from the **svy: tab** command will give
us the same information as the **svy: proportion** command.

svy: tab dmdmartl(running tabulate on estimation sample) Number of strata = 14 Number of obs = 5553 Number of PSUs = 31 Population size = 223858353 Design df = 17 ----------------------- Marital | Status | proportions ----------+------------ married | .5308 widowed | .0562 divorced | .1069 separate | .024 never ma | .1987 living w | .0834 | Total | 1 ----------------------- Key: proportions = cell proportionssvy: proportion dmdmartl(running proportion on estimation sample) Survey: Proportion estimation Number of strata = 14 Number of obs = 5553 Number of PSUs = 31 Population size = 223858353 Design df = 17 _prop_5: dmdmartl = never married _prop_6: dmdmartl = living with partner -------------------------------------------------------------- | Linearized | Proportion Std. Err. [95% Conf. Interval] -------------+------------------------------------------------ dmdmartl | married | .5307919 .0204953 .4874276 .5736962 widowed | .0562251 .0031996 .0498433 .0633695 divorced | .1068817 .007248 .0925245 .1231643 separated | .0239747 .0031613 .0181365 .0316316 _prop_5 | .1986955 .0236294 .1534768 .2532512 _prop_6 | .0834312 .0064732 .070751 .0981439 --------------------------------------------------------------

Let’s use some options with the **svy: tab** command so that we can see
the estimated number of people in each category.

svy: tab dmdmartl, count cellwidth(12) format(%12.2g)(running tabulate on estimation sample) Number of strata = 14 Number of obs = 5553 Number of PSUs = 31 Population size = 223858353 Design df = 17 ------------------------ Marital | Status | count ----------+------------- married | 118822198 widowed | 12586462 divorced | 23926362 separate | 5366932 never ma | 44479637 living w | 18676762 | Total | 223858353 ------------------------ Key: count = weighted counts

There are many options that can by used with **svy: tab**. Please
see the Stata help file for the **svy: tabulate** command for a complete
listing and description of each option. Only five items can be displayed
at once, and the **ci** option counts as two items.

svy: tab dmdmartl, cell count obs cellwidth(12) format(%12.2g)(running tabulate on estimation sample) Number of strata = 14 Number of obs = 5553 Number of PSUs = 31 Population size = 223858353 Design df = 17 ---------------------------------------------------- Marital | Status | count proportions obs ----------+----------------------------------------- married | 118822198 .53 2683 widowed | 12586462 .056 467 divorced | 23926362 .11 571 separate | 5366932 .024 204 never ma | 44479637 .2 1188 living w | 18676762 .083 440 | Total | 223858353 1 5553 ---------------------------------------------------- Key: count = weighted counts proportions = cell proportions obs = number of observationssvy: tab dmdmartl, count se cellwidth(15) format(%15.2g)(running tabulate on estimation sample) Number of strata = 14 Number of obs = 5553 Number of PSUs = 31 Population size = 223858353 Design df = 17 -------------------------------------------- Marital | Status | count se ----------+--------------------------------- married | 118822198 10556102 widowed | 12586462 1087437 divorced | 23926362 2606988 separate | 5366932 614868 never ma | 44479637 4687152 living w | 18676762 1874572 | Total | 223858353 -------------------------------------------- Key: count = weighted counts se = linearized standard errors of weighted countssvy: tab dmdmartl, count deff deft cv cellwidth(12) format(%12.2g)(running tabulate on estimation sample) Number of strata = 14 Number of obs = 5553 Number of PSUs = 31 Population size = 223858353 Design df = 17 ------------------------------------------------------------------ Marital | Status | count cv deff deft ----------+------------------------------------------------------- married | 118822198 8.9 50 7 widowed | 12586462 8.6 2.5 1.6 divorced | 23926362 11 7.9 2.8 separate | 5366932 11 1.8 1.3 never ma | 44479637 11 15 3.9 living w | 18676762 10 5.1 2.3 | Total | 223858353 ------------------------------------------------------------------ Key: count = weighted counts cv = coefficients of variation of weighted counts deff = deff for variances of weighted counts deft = deft for variances of weighted counts

Chi-square tests are provided by default when **svy: tab** is issued with
two variables. You will usually want to use the design-based test.

The proportion of observations in each cell can be obtained using either the **
svy: tab** or the **svy: proportion** command. If you want to compare
the proportions within two cells, you can use the **lincom** command.

svy: tab dmdmartl female, cell obs count cellwidth(12) format(%12.2g)(running tabulate on estimation sample) Number of strata = 14 Number of obs = 5553 Number of PSUs = 31 Population size = 223858353 Design df = 17 ---------------------------------------------------- Marital | RECODE of riagendr (Gender) Status | male female Total ----------+----------------------------------------- married | 58666065 60156133 118822198 | .26 .27 .53 | 1429 1254 2683 | widowed | 2732447 9854015 12586462 | .012 .044 .056 | 122 345 467 | divorced | 9287612 14638749 23926362 | .041 .065 .11 | 237 334 571 | separate | 2019361 3347571 5366932 | .009 .015 .024 | 79 125 204 | never ma | 25152255 19327382 44479637 | .11 .086 .2 | 634 554 1188 | living w | 9529522 9147240 18676762 | .043 .041 .083 | 237 203 440 | Total | 107387263 116471090 223858353 | .48 .52 1 | 2738 2815 5553 ---------------------------------------------------- Key: weighted counts cell proportions number of observations Pearson: Uncorrected chi2(5) = 148.4759 Design-based F(3.19, 54.18) = 22.0446 P = 0.0000svy: proportion dmdmartl, over(female)(running proportion on estimation sample) Survey: Proportion estimation Number of strata = 14 Number of obs = 5553 Number of PSUs = 31 Population size = 223858353 Design df = 17 married: dmdmartl = married widowed: dmdmartl = widowed divorced: dmdmartl = divorced separated: dmdmartl = separated _prop_5: dmdmartl = never married _prop_6: dmdmartl = living with partner male: female = male female: female = female -------------------------------------------------------------- | Linearized Over | Proportion Std. Err. [95% Conf. Interval] -------------+------------------------------------------------ married | male | .5463038 .0244819 .494338 .5972798 female | .5164898 .0186122 .4772006 .5555763 -------------+------------------------------------------------ widowed | male | .0254448 .0029445 .0199183 .0324539 female | .0846048 .005444 .0738042 .0968207 -------------+------------------------------------------------ divorced | male | .0864871 .0103046 .0670772 .1108462 female | .1256857 .0097098 .1065877 .1476401 -------------+------------------------------------------------ separated | male | .0188045 .0035212 .0126507 .0278672 female | .0287416 .0042363 .0210327 .0391631 -------------+------------------------------------------------ _prop_5 | male | .2342201 .0271275 .1818695 .2961843 female | .1659415 .021306 .1257079 .2158725 -------------+------------------------------------------------ _prop_6 | male | .0887398 .0077162 .0737516 .106424 female | .0785366 .0066277 .0656434 .0937081 --------------------------------------------------------------lincom [married]male - [married]female( 1) [married]male - [married]female = 0 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Proportion | Coef. Std. Err. t P>|t| [95% Conf. Interval] -------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- (1) | .0298139 .0132293 2.25 0.038 .0019026 .0577253 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------display .5463038 - .5164898.029814

### Graphs with categorical variables

Let’s create a bar graph of the variable **female**. This graph will
show the percent of observations that are female and male. To do this, we
will need to create a new variable, which we will call **male**; it will
be the opposite of **female**.

gen male = !female graph bar (mean) female male [pw = wtint2yr], percentages bargap(7)

We can also graph the mean of the variable **hsq496** by each level of **
dmdmart1**.

svy: mean hsq496, over(dmdmartl)(running mean on estimation sample) Survey: Mean estimation Number of strata = 14 Number of obs = 4692 Number of PSUs = 31 Population size = 193938169 Design df = 17 married: dmdmartl = married widowed: dmdmartl = widowed divorced: dmdmartl = divorced separated: dmdmartl = separated _subpop_5: dmdmartl = never married _subpop_6: dmdmartl = living with partner -------------------------------------------------------------- | Linearized Over | Mean Std. Err. [95% Conf. Interval] -------------+------------------------------------------------ hsq496 | married | 4.915051 .2864456 4.310704 5.519399 widowed | 5.450213 .3868792 4.633969 6.266457 divorced | 7.514127 .473958 6.514163 8.514091 separated | 7.231938 1.136924 4.833238 9.630637 _subpop_5 | 6.223865 .408766 5.361444 7.086286 _subpop_6 | 7.266146 .6322425 5.93223 8.600061 --------------------------------------------------------------graph hbar hsq496 [pw = wtint2yr], over(dmdmartl, gap(*2)) /// title("During the last 30 days, for about how many days" /// "have you felt worried, tense or anxious?")

Finally, we will graph the mean of **pad630** for each level of **
dmdeduc2**.

svy: mean pad630, over(dmdeduc2)(running mean on estimation sample) Survey: Mean estimation Number of strata = 14 Number of obs = 1706 Number of PSUs = 31 Population size = 77856183 Design df = 17 _subpop_1: dmdeduc2 = less than 9th grade _subpop_2: dmdeduc2 = no hs diploma _subpop_3: dmdeduc2 = hs grad or GED _subpop_4: dmdeduc2 = some college or AA degree _subpop_5: dmdeduc2 = college grad or above -------------------------------------------------------------- | Linearized Over | Mean Std. Err. [95% Conf. Interval] -------------+------------------------------------------------ pad630 | _subpop_1 | 176.8361 19.65517 135.3673 218.3048 _subpop_2 | 186.4248 6.52083 172.6671 200.1826 _subpop_3 | 157.9824 7.430086 142.3063 173.6585 _subpop_4 | 147.1004 10.20694 125.5657 168.6352 _subpop_5 | 111.1123 7.475883 95.3396 126.8851 --------------------------------------------------------------graph bar pad630 [pw = wtint2yr], over(dmdeduc2, label(angle(45))) /// title("How much time do you spend doing" /// "moderate-intensity activities at work on a typical day?")

## OLS regression

Now that we have descriptive statistics on our variables, we may want to run
some inferential statistics, such as OLS regression or logistic regression.
As before, we simply need to use the **-svy-** prefix before our regression commands.

Please note that the following analyses are shown only as examples of how to do these analyses in Stata. There was no attempt to create substantively meaningful models. Rather, the variables were chosen for illustrative purposes only. We do not recommend that researchers create their models this way.

We will start with an OLS regression with one categorical predictor (**female**)
and one continuous predictor (**ridageyr**). In the output we see both the number of observations used in and the estimate of the size of the population. We see the overall test of the model and the R-squared for the model. The R-squared is the population R-squared and can be thought of as the adjusted R-squared.

We will follow the **svy: regress** command with the **margins** command, which gives us the
predicted values for each level of **female**. Notice that we use the **vce(unconditional)** option with each call to **
margins**. The following information is quoted from the Stata 15 svy manual, page 124: When performing estimations with linearized standard errors, we
use the **vce(unconditional)** option to compute marginal effects so
that we can use the results to make inferences on the population. **margins** with
**vce(unconditional)** uses linearization to compute the
unconditional variance of the marginal means.

svy: regress pad630 i.female ridageyr(running regress on estimation sample) Survey: Linear regression Number of strata = 14 Number of obs = 2054 Number of PSUs = 31 Population size = 88768571 Design df = 17 F( 2, 16) = 17.18 Prob > F = 0.0001 R-squared = 0.0193 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | Linearized pad630 | Coef. Std. Err. t P>|t| [95% Conf. Interval] -------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- female | female | -33.12513 6.018746 -5.50 0.000 -45.82358 -20.42669 ridageyr | -.287604 .1289996 -2.23 0.040 -.5597695 -.0154386 _cons | 167.2895 9.314455 17.96 0.000 147.6378 186.9413 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------margins female, vce(unconditional)Predictive margins Number of obs = 2054 Expression : Linear prediction, predict() ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | Linearized | Margin Std. Err. t P>|t| [95% Conf. Interval] -------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- female | male | 155.248 6.994755 22.19 0.000 140.4903 170.0056 female | 122.1228 5.366491 22.76 0.000 110.8005 133.4452 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now let’s run a model with a categorical by categorical interaction term.
We can use the **contrast** command to get the test of the interaction
displayed as an F-test rather than a t-statistic. Of course, the p-value
is exactly the same. We can use the **margins** command to get the predicted
values of **pad630** for each combination of **female** and **hsq571**.
The **marginsplot**
command is used to obtain a graph of the interaction (**marginsplot** graphs the values shown
in the output from the **margins** command).

* pad630 = How much time do you spend doing moderate-intensity activities on a type work day?* hsq571 = During the past 12 months, have you donated blood?svy: regress pad630 i.female##i.hsq571 ridageyr(running regress on estimation sample) Survey: Linear regression Number of strata = 14 Number of obs = 1673 Number of PSUs = 31 Population size = 76183526 Design df = 17 F( 4, 14) = 22.40 Prob > F = 0.0000 R-squared = 0.0457 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | Linearized pad630 | Coef. Std. Err. t P>|t| [95% Conf. Interval] --------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- female | female | -40.42599 6.586285 -6.14 0.000 -54.32184 -26.53014 | hsq571 | yes | -42.38641 19.18468 -2.21 0.041 -82.86254 -1.910279 | female#hsq571 | female#yes | 59.28491 19.63991 3.02 0.008 17.84833 100.7215 | ridageyr | -.9869588 .2047143 -4.82 0.000 -1.418868 -.5550493 _cons | 209.1557 11.97401 17.47 0.000 183.8927 234.4186 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------contrast female#hsq571Contrasts of marginal linear predictions Design df = 17 Margins : asbalanced ------------------------------------------------- | df F P>F --------------+---------------------------------- female#hsq571 | 1 9.11 0.0077 Design | 17 ------------------------------------------------- Note: F statistics are adjusted for the survey design.margins female#hsq571, vce(unconditional)Predictive margins Number of obs = 1673 Expression : Linear prediction, predict() ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | Linearized | Margin Std. Err. t P>|t| [95% Conf. Interval] --------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- female#hsq571 | male#no | 165.6268 6.65576 24.88 0.000 151.5844 179.6692 male#yes | 123.2404 22.22847 5.54 0.000 76.34241 170.1383 female#no | 125.2008 5.586263 22.41 0.000 113.4148 136.9868 female#yes | 142.0993 28.20328 5.04 0.000 82.59557 201.603 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------marginsplotVariables that uniquely identify margins: female hsq571

Some of you may recognize this analysis as a “difference-in-differences” analysis. In other words, the term of interest is the binary-by-binary interaction term. Let’s reproduce the coefficient of this interaction term, 59.28491, by taking the difference of the differences ((male_no – female_no) -(male_yes – female_yes)). First, we need to need to rerun the **margins** command with the **post** option, so that we can access the values remembered by **margins** with another command. Next, we will rerun the **margins** command, but with the **coeflegend** option only. This will show us the names of the values. We will use these names rather than the actual values themselves, so that if the data or model were changed, the code would not need to be modified. We will use the **lincom** command to do the math for us. The advantage of using the **lincom** command over the **display** command is that **lincom** will also produce the standard error.

margins female#hsq571, vce(unconditional) postPredictive margins Number of obs = 1,673 Expression : Linear prediction, predict() ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | Linearized | Margin Std. Err. t P>|t| [95% Conf. Interval] --------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- female#hsq571 | male#no | 165.6268 6.65576 24.88 0.000 151.5844 179.6692 male#yes | 123.2404 22.22847 5.54 0.000 76.34241 170.1383 female#no | 125.2008 5.586263 22.41 0.000 113.4148 136.9868 female#yes | 142.0993 28.20328 5.04 0.000 82.59557 201.603 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------margins, coeflegendPredictive margins Number of obs = 1,673 Expression : Linear prediction, predict() ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | Margin Legend --------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- female#hsq571 | male#no | 165.6268 _b[0bn.female#0bn.hsq571] male#yes | 123.2404 _b[0bn.female#1.hsq571] female#no | 125.2008 _b[1.female#0bn.hsq571] female#yes | 142.0993 _b[1.female#1.hsq571] -------------------------------------------------------------------------------lincom (_b[0bn.female#0bn.hsq571]-_b[0bn.female#1.hsq571]) - (_b[1.female#0bn.hsq571]-_b[1.female#1.hsq571])( 1) 0bn.female#0bn.hsq571 - 0bn.female#1.hsq571 - 1.female#0bn.hsq571 + 1.female#1.hsq571 = 0 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | Coef. Std. Err. t P>|t| [95% Conf. Interval] -------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- (1) | 59.28491 19.63991 3.02 0.008 17.84833 100.7215 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

We can see that the output from the **lincom** command is the same as the output for the interaction term in the original regression command.

Looking back at the graph of the interaction, you may wonder if the two points for male are statistically significantly different from one another, and the same for the two points for females. The **lincom** command can be used for these comparisons.

* maleslincom _b[0bn.female#0bn.hsq571]-_b[0bn.female#1.hsq571]( 1) 0bn.female#0bn.hsq571 - 0bn.female#1.hsq571 = 0 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | Coef. Std. Err. t P>|t| [95% Conf. Interval] -------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- (1) | 42.38641 19.18468 2.21 0.041 1.910279 82.86254 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ * femaleslincom _b[1.female#0bn.hsq571]-_b[1.female#1.hsq571]( 1) 1.female#0bn.hsq571 - 1.female#1.hsq571 = 0 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | Coef. Std. Err. t P>|t| [95% Conf. Interval] -------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- (1) | -16.8985 25.60101 -0.66 0.518 -70.91192 37.11491 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Despite the overlapping error bars, the difference between yes and no on the variable **hsq571** for males is statistically significant; it is not statistically significant for females.

In the next example, we will use a categorical by continuous interaction.
In the first call to the **margins** command, we get the simple slope
coefficients for males and females. The p-values in this table tell us
that both slopes are significantly different from 0. In the second call to the **margins**
command, we get the predicted values for each level of **female** at pad680 =
0, pad680 = 200, pad680 = 400, up to pad680 = 1400. The t-statistics and
corresponding p-values tell us if the predicted value is different from 0.

* pad680 = How much time do you usually spend sitting on a typical day?svy: regress pad630 i.female##c.pad680(running regress on estimation sample) Survey: Linear regression Number of strata = 14 Number of obs = 2050 Number of PSUs = 31 Population size = 88700876 Design df = 17 F( 3, 15) = 131.11 Prob > F = 0.0000 R-squared = 0.0894 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | Linearized pad630 | Coef. Std. Err. t P>|t| [95% Conf. Interval] ----------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- female | female | -73.89628 18.78819 -3.93 0.001 -113.5359 -34.25665 pad680 | -.2389814 .0194172 -12.31 0.000 -.2799481 -.1980148 | female#c.pad680 | female | .1273678 .0445652 2.86 0.011 .0333435 .2213922 | _cons | 234.2159 9.710639 24.12 0.000 213.7282 254.7035 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------margins female, dydx(pad680) vce(unconditional)Average marginal effects Number of obs = 2050 Expression : Linear prediction, predict() dy/dx w.r.t. : pad680 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | Linearized | dy/dx Std. Err. t P>|t| [95% Conf. Interval] -------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- pad680 | female | male | -.2389814 .0194172 -12.31 0.000 -.2799481 -.1980148 female | -.1116136 .0293859 -3.80 0.001 -.1736123 -.0496149 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------margins female, at(pad680=(0(200)1400)) vsquish vce(unconditional)Adjusted predictions Number of obs = 2050 Expression : Linear prediction, predict() 1._at : pad680 = 0 2._at : pad680 = 200 3._at : pad680 = 400 4._at : pad680 = 600 5._at : pad680 = 800 6._at : pad680 = 1000 7._at : pad680 = 1200 8._at : pad680 = 1400 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | Linearized | Margin Std. Err. t P>|t| [95% Conf. Interval] -------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- _at#female | 1#male | 234.2159 9.710639 24.12 0.000 213.7282 254.7035 1#female | 160.3196 12.25815 13.08 0.000 134.4572 186.182 2#male | 186.4196 6.921151 26.93 0.000 171.8173 201.022 2#female | 137.9969 7.310548 18.88 0.000 122.573 153.4208 3#male | 138.6233 5.627637 24.63 0.000 126.75 150.4966 3#female | 115.6742 5.070343 22.81 0.000 104.9767 126.3717 4#male | 90.82704 6.752807 13.45 0.000 76.57986 105.0742 4#female | 93.35145 8.188708 11.40 0.000 76.07479 110.6281 5#male | 43.03076 9.470621 4.54 0.000 23.04949 63.01202 5#female | 71.02874 13.3223 5.33 0.000 42.92113 99.13634 6#male | -4.765528 12.80418 -0.37 0.714 -31.77999 22.24893 6#female | 48.70602 18.89431 2.58 0.020 8.842508 88.56953 7#male | -52.56181 16.38181 -3.21 0.005 -87.1244 -17.99922 7#female | 26.3833 24.60871 1.07 0.299 -25.53653 78.30313 8#male | -100.3581 20.07342 -5.00 0.000 -142.7093 -58.00688 8#female | 4.060579 30.38526 0.13 0.895 -60.04672 68.16788 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------marginsplotVariables that uniquely identify margins: pad680 female

In the example below, we get the difference between the predicted values for
males and females at eight values of **pad680**. We then use the **
marginsplot** command to graph these differences. This graph shows that
the difference between males and females is larger at the extreme values of **
pad680**, as is the variability around those estimates.

Notice that is in the output from the margins command above, the predicted value for 4#female is 93.35145 and the predicted value for 4#male is 90.82704. 93.35145-90.82704 = 2.52441, which is the value of dy/dx on line 4 of the output below. The corresponding p-value is .808, which is not statistically significant. You can see this in the graph above, where the point for males and females appear to be on top of each other.

margins, dydx(female) at(pad680=(0(200)1400)) vsquish vce(unconditional)Conditional marginal effects Number of obs = 2050 Expression : Linear prediction, predict() dy/dx w.r.t. : 1.female 1._at : pad680 = 0 2._at : pad680 = 200 3._at : pad680 = 400 4._at : pad680 = 600 5._at : pad680 = 800 6._at : pad680 = 1000 7._at : pad680 = 1200 8._at : pad680 = 1400 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | Linearized | dy/dx Std. Err. t P>|t| [95% Conf. Interval] -------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- 1.female | _at | 1 | -73.89628 18.78819 -3.93 0.001 -113.5359 -34.25665 2 | -48.42271 10.55029 -4.59 0.000 -70.68189 -26.16354 3 | -22.94915 5.339066 -4.30 0.000 -34.21359 -11.6847 4 | 2.524416 10.22678 0.25 0.808 -19.05221 24.10104 5 | 27.99798 18.42697 1.52 0.147 -10.87952 66.87548 6 | 53.47154 27.08143 1.97 0.065 -3.665269 110.6084 7 | 78.94511 35.86278 2.20 0.042 3.281267 154.609 8 | 104.4187 44.69629 2.34 0.032 10.11775 198.7196 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Note: dy/dx for factor levels is the discrete change from the base level.marginsplot, yline(0)Variables that uniquely identify margins: pad680

Let’s remake this graph with confidence interval as an area plot.

marginsplot, recast(line) recastci(rarea) yline(0)Variables that uniquely identify margins: pad680

If we use a categorical predictor variable in our model that has more than
two levels, we may want to run comparisons between each of the levels. In
the example below, we use the educational attainment variable, **dmdeduc2**,
as a predictor. We use the **contrast** command to determine if, taken
together, **dmdeduc2**, is a statistically significant predictor of our
outcome variable, **pad630**. Next, we use the **pwcompare** command
to conduct all pairwise comparisons. We use the **mcompare(sidak)**
option to adjust the p-values for the multiple comparisons, and we use the **
pveffects** option to have the test statistics and p-values shown in the
output. Other options that we could have used with the **mcompare**
option are **bonferroni** and **scheffe**.

svy: regress pad630 i.dmdeduc2 ridageyr(running regress on estimation sample) Survey: Linear regression Number of strata = 14 Number of obs = 1706 Number of PSUs = 31 Population size = 77856183 Design df = 17 F( 5, 13) = 14.67 Prob > F = 0.0001 R-squared = 0.0541 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | Linearized pad630 | Coef. Std. Err. t P>|t| [95% Conf. Interval] ---------------------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- dmdeduc2 | no hs diploma | 5.590284 17.44227 0.32 0.752 -31.20968 42.39025 hs grad or GED | -23.40642 18.92372 -1.24 0.233 -63.33198 16.51915 some college or AA degree | -36.62121 23.10453 -1.59 0.131 -85.36752 12.12509 college grad or above | -69.28669 22.12513 -3.13 0.006 -115.9666 -22.60674 | ridageyr | -1.167769 .2339256 -4.99 0.000 -1.661309 -.6742287 _cons | 235.0531 18.73331 12.55 0.000 195.5293 274.5769 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------contrast dmdeduc2Contrasts of marginal linear predictions Design df = 17 Margins : asbalanced ------------------------------------------------ | df F P>F -------------+---------------------------------- dmdeduc2 | 4 14.46 0.0001 Design | 17 ------------------------------------------------ Note: F statistics are adjusted for the survey design.pwcompare dmdeduc2, mcompare(sidak) cformat(%3.1f) pveffectsPairwise comparisons of marginal linear predictions Design df = 17 Margins : asbalanced --------------------------- | Number of | Comparisons -------------+------------- dmdeduc2 | 10 --------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | Sidak | Contrast Std. Err. t P>|t| ----------------------------------------------------+--------------------------------------- dmdeduc2 | no hs diploma vs less than 9th grade | 5.6 17.4 0.32 1.000 hs grad or GED vs less than 9th grade | -23.4 18.9 -1.24 0.929 some college or AA degree vs less than 9th grade | -36.6 23.1 -1.59 0.756 college grad or above vs less than 9th grade | -69.3 22.1 -3.13 0.059 hs grad or GED vs no hs diploma | -29.0 9.8 -2.95 0.087 some college or AA degree vs no hs diploma | -42.2 10.0 -4.23 0.006 college grad or above vs no hs diploma | -74.9 10.2 -7.31 0.000 some college or AA degree vs hs grad or GED | -13.2 13.9 -0.95 0.988 college grad or above vs hs grad or GED | -45.9 13.2 -3.47 0.029 college grad or above vs some college or AA degree | -32.7 12.2 -2.68 0.147 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

### Logistic regression

Let’s run a logistic regression. We will use the variable **paq665**
(do you do any moderate-intensity sports, fitness or recreational activities
that cause a small increase in breathing or heart rate at least 10 minutes
continually?)
as the outcome variable. We will also limit the analysis to those who are
greater than age 20. Before we run our logistic regression, let’s look at
the distribution of the outcome variable, and let’s look at the crosstabulation
of the outcome variable with our categorical predictor variable. The
purpose of the first descriptive analysis is to assess the proportion and number
of cases in each level of the outcome variable. If we found that there was
a very small proportion of cases in one of the levels, we may encounter
estimation problems with the logistic regression. Likewise, if the
crosstabulation between the outcome variable and the categorical predictor
variable showed that one or more cells had very few unweighted observations or
no observations at all, we might want to recode the predictor variable into
fewer categories so that there were a sufficient number of observations in each
cell. The results below do not look problematic, although there are
relatively few observations that are coded as 1 on our outcome variable and 5 on
our predictor variable. This might increase the standard error around that
point estimate.

* paq665 = Do you do any moderate-intensity sports, fitness or recreational activities that cause a small increase in breathing or heart rate at least 10 minutes continually?svy, subpop(if ridageyr > 20): tab paq665, /// cell obs count cellwidth(12) format(%12.2g)(running tabulate on estimation sample) Number of strata = 14 Number of obs = 9755 Number of PSUs = 31 Population size = 306516207 Subpop. no. of obs = 5443 Subpop. size = 218554854 Design df = 17 ---------------------------------------------------- Moderate | recreatio | nal | activitie | s | count proportions obs ----------+----------------------------------------- no | 116709772 .53 3195 yes | 101845081 .47 2248 | Total | 218554854 1 5443 ---------------------------------------------------- Key: count = weighted counts proportions = cell proportions obs = number of observationssvy, subpop(if ridageyr > 20): tab hsd010 paq665, /// cell obs count cellwidth(12) format(%12.2g)(running tabulate on estimation sample) Number of strata = 14 Number of obs = 8915 Number of PSUs = 31 Population size = 277379812 Subpop. no. of obs = 4603 Subpop. size = 189418459 Design df = 17 ---------------------------------------------------- General | health | Moderate recreational activities condition | no yes Total ----------+----------------------------------------- excellen | 9401577 13365343 22766920 | .05 .071 .12 | 223 234 457 | very goo | 27412706 34747263 62159969 | .14 .18 .33 | 591 650 1241 | good | 41493331 31885029 73378359 | .22 .17 .39 | 1092 753 1845 | fair | 18274770 8295293 26570064 | .096 .044 .14 | 634 256 890 | poor | 3896015 647132 4543147 | .021 .0034 .024 | 145 25 170 | Total | 100478399 88940060 189418459 | .53 .47 1 | 2685 1918 4603 ---------------------------------------------------- Key: weighted counts cell proportions number of observations Pearson: Uncorrected chi2(4) = 386.5375 Design-based F(2.76, 46.90) = 35.0850 P = 0.0000

Now let’s run the logistic regression. We can use the **contrast** command
to get the multi-degree-of-freedom test of **hsd010** (which is statistically significant). Note that the logistic regression coefficients are interpreted the same way that they are in an unweighted model.

svy, subpop(if ridageyr > 20): logit paq665 ib3.hsd010 c.ridageyr(running logit on estimation sample) Survey: Logistic regression Number of strata = 14 Number of obs = 8915 Number of PSUs = 31 Population size = 277379812 Subpop. no. of obs = 4603 Subpop. size = 189418459 Design df = 17 F( 5, 13) = 37.01 Prob > F = 0.0000 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | Linearized paq665 | Coef. Std. Err. t P>|t| [95% Conf. Interval] -------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- hsd010 | excellent | .5986804 .1120919 5.34 0.000 .3621872 .8351736 very good | .4914449 .1141339 4.31 0.000 .2506434 .7322465 fair | -.4945664 .1127125 -4.39 0.000 -.7323691 -.2567638 poor | -1.450551 .2048429 -7.08 0.000 -1.882732 -1.01837 | ridageyr | -.0109676 .00292 -3.76 0.002 -.0171282 -.004807 _cons | .2653286 .1382701 1.92 0.072 -.0263958 .557053 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------contrast hsd010Contrasts of marginal linear predictions Design df = 17 Margins : asbalanced ------------------------------------------------ | df F P>F -------------+---------------------------------- hsd010 | 4 44.44 0.0000 Design | 17 ------------------------------------------------ Note: F statistics are adjusted for the survey design.

Let’s include a categorical by continuous interaction in the model. We
will use the **contrast** command to determine if the interaction term (as a
whole) is statistically significant. We will use the **contrast**
command to get the multi-degree-of-freedom test of the interaction, the **margins**
command to get the predicted probabilities and the **marginsplot** command
to graph the interaction.

* paq665 = Do you do any moderate-intensity sports, fitness or recreational activities that cause a small increase in breathing or heart rate at least 10 minutes continually? * hsd010 = Would you say that your general health is...; 1 = excellent, 2 = very good, 3 = good, 4 = fair, 5 = poorsvy, subpop(if ridageyr > 20): logit paq665 ib3.hsd010##c.ridageyr(running logit on estimation sample) Survey: Logistic regression Number of strata = 14 Number of obs = 8915 Number of PSUs = 31 Population size = 277379812 Subpop. no. of obs = 4603 Subpop. size = 189418459 Design df = 17 F( 9, 9) = 50.07 Prob > F = 0.0000 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | Linearized paq665 | Coef. Std. Err. t P>|t| [95% Conf. Interval] ------------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- hsd010 | excellent | .3858144 .5191089 0.74 0.467 -.7094096 1.481038 very good | .652864 .2254827 2.90 0.010 .1771372 1.128591 fair | .3499552 .3042182 1.15 0.266 -.2918891 .9917995 poor | -.9774887 1.318543 -0.74 0.469 -3.759372 1.804395 | ridageyr | -.0083106 .004617 -1.80 0.090 -.0180516 .0014303 | hsd010#c.ridageyr | excellent | .0046206 .0101254 0.46 0.654 -.0167421 .0259833 very good | -.0033669 .0042601 -0.79 0.440 -.0123549 .0056211 fair | -.0170309 .0064368 -2.65 0.017 -.0306114 -.0034504 poor | -.0090097 .0265987 -0.34 0.739 -.0651279 .0471086 | _cons | .1376637 .2029975 0.68 0.507 -.2906237 .5659511 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------contrast hsd010#c.ridageyrContrasts of marginal linear predictions Design df = 17 Margins : asbalanced ----------------------------------------------------- | df F P>F ------------------+---------------------------------- hsd010#c.ridageyr | 4 4.73 0.0126 Design | 17 ----------------------------------------------------- Note: F statistics are adjusted for the survey design.margins hsd010, subpop(if ridageyr > 20) at(ridageyr=(20(10)80)) /// vsquish vce(unconditional)Adjusted predictions Number of obs = 8915 Subpop. no. of obs = 4603 Expression : Pr(paq665), predict() 1._at : ridageyr = 20 2._at : ridageyr = 30 3._at : ridageyr = 40 4._at : ridageyr = 50 5._at : ridageyr = 60 6._at : ridageyr = 70 7._at : ridageyr = 80 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | Linearized | Margin Std. Err. t P>|t| [95% Conf. Interval] -------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- _at#hsd010 | 1#excellent | .6105625 .0627257 9.73 0.000 .4782229 .7429022 1#very good | .6357529 .030173 21.07 0.000 .5720935 .6994123 1#good | .4928633 .0299032 16.48 0.000 .4297731 .5559535 1#fair | .4951972 .0374002 13.24 0.000 .4162897 .5741046 1#poor | .2339337 .1366427 1.71 0.105 -.0543571 .5222245 2#excellent | .6017536 .0467599 12.87 0.000 .5030987 .7004084 2#very good | .6083073 .0251426 24.19 0.000 .555261 .6613536 2#good | .4721152 .0212358 22.23 0.000 .4273116 .5169188 2#fair | .4322622 .0318406 13.58 0.000 .3650845 .4994399 2#poor | .2043323 .0853799 2.39 0.029 .0241965 .3844681 3#excellent | .5928782 .0329296 18.00 0.000 .5234028 .6623537 3#very good | .5801593 .0224851 25.80 0.000 .5327198 .6275988 3#good | .451463 .0165591 27.26 0.000 .4165264 .4863996 3#fair | .3714403 .0279114 13.31 0.000 .3125525 .4303282 3#poor | .1776082 .043438 4.09 0.001 .0859621 .2692544 4#excellent | .5839418 .0257247 22.70 0.000 .5296674 .6382163 4#very good | .55148 .0236447 23.32 0.000 .501594 .6013659 4#good | .4309767 .0189088 22.79 0.000 .3910827 .4708706 4#fair | .3144367 .0261895 12.01 0.000 .2591816 .3696917 4#poor | .1537041 .0180881 8.50 0.000 .1155416 .1918666 5#excellent | .5749499 .0307861 18.68 0.000 .5099969 .6399029 5#very good | .5224542 .0284286 18.38 0.000 .4624752 .5824332 5#good | .4107239 .0261597 15.70 0.000 .3555316 .4659161 5#fair | .2625274 .0261464 10.04 0.000 .2073633 .3176914 5#poor | .1324989 .030077 4.41 0.000 .0690418 .1959559 6#excellent | .5659081 .0443458 12.76 0.000 .4723467 .6594696 6#very good | .4932759 .0354001 13.93 0.000 .4185883 .5679635 6#good | .3907692 .0350558 11.15 0.000 .3168079 .4647305 6#fair | .2164816 .0266714 8.12 0.000 .1602098 .2727533 6#poor | .1138257 .0489862 2.32 0.033 .0104739 .2171774 7#excellent | .5568223 .0611297 9.11 0.000 .4278498 .6857948 7#very good | .4641434 .0433376 10.71 0.000 .3727091 .5555776 7#good | .3711734 .0442524 8.39 0.000 .277809 .4645377 7#fair | .1765782 .026898 6.56 0.000 .1198284 .2333281 7#poor | .0974883 .0635355 1.53 0.143 -.0365598 .2315365 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------marginsplotVariables that uniquely identify margins: ridageyr hsd010

Next, we will run a logistic regression model and use the **
estat gof** command to get the Archer-Lemeshow test (which is a modification
of the Hosmer-Lemeshow test that can be used with survey data). The
numerator degrees of freedom are calculated as g – 1, and the denominator
degrees of freedom are calculated as f – g + 2, where f = the number of sampled
clusters – the number of strata and g = the number of groups (10 is the
default). For the following example, we have 10 – 1 = 9 numerator degrees
of freedom and 17 – 10 + 2 = 9 denominator degrees of freedom.

As of Stata 15, **estat gof** cannot follow a model specified with a
subpopulation.

* paq665 = Do you do any moderate-intensity sports, fitness or recreational activities that cause a small increase in breathing or heart rate at least 10 minutes continually? * pad680 = How much time do you usually spend sitting on a typical day?svy: logit paq665 i.female##c.pad680(running logit on estimation sample) Survey: Logistic regression Number of strata = 14 Number of obs = 6742 Number of PSUs = 31 Population size = 255503942 Design df = 17 F( 3, 15) = 1.16 Prob > F = 0.3593 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | Linearized paq665 | Coef. Std. Err. t P>|t| [95% Conf. Interval] ----------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- female | female | .1277199 .1276729 1.00 0.331 -.1416463 .3970861 pad680 | .0000791 .0002271 0.35 0.732 -.0004 .0005582 | female#c.pad680 | female | -.0003267 .0002309 -1.41 0.175 -.0008139 .0001605 | _cons | -.1236965 .1246061 -0.99 0.335 -.3865923 .1391994 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------estat gofLogistic model for paq665, goodness-of-fit test F(9,9) = 0.89 Prob > F = 0.5656

### Ordinal Logistic Regression

Here is an example of an ordinal logistic regression. The outcome variable, **dmdeduc2**, has ordered categories, but it is not a continuous variable. In the first call, we get the coefficients in the log-odds metric. In the second call, we request odds ratios. The discussion of ordinal logistic regression will be minimal; for more information regarding ordinal logistic regression, please see our Stata Data Analysis Examples: Ordinal Logistic Regression and Stata Annotated Output: Ordinal Logistic Regression. Although these pages show examples that use non-weighted data, they are still helpful because the interpretation of the coefficients is the same with weighted and non-weighted data.

svy: ologit dmdeduc2 i.female i.dmdborn4 pad680(running ologit on estimation sample) Survey: Ordered logistic regression Number of strata = 14 Number of obs = 5,522 Number of PSUs = 31 Population size = 222,978,408 Design df = 17 F( 3, 15) = 95.22 Prob > F = 0.0000 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | Linearized dmdeduc2 | Coef. Std. Err. t P>|t| [95% Conf. Interval] -------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- female | female | .0975701 .048719 2.00 0.061 -.0052179 .2003581 | dmdborn4 | born in US | .7093888 .1216176 5.83 0.000 .4527981 .9659794 pad680 | .001924 .0001423 13.52 0.000 .0016238 .0022242 -------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- /cut1 | -1.528006 .1535442 -1.851956 -1.204056 /cut2 | -.3100434 .156401 -.6400207 .0199339 /cut3 | .8094935 .1349988 .524671 1.094316 /cut4 | 2.215668 .1222484 1.957747 2.47359 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ologit, orSurvey: Ordered logistic regression Number of strata = 14 Number of obs = 5,522 Number of PSUs = 31 Population size = 222,978,408 Design df = 17 F( 3, 15) = 95.22 Prob > F = 0.0000 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | Linearized dmdeduc2 | Odds Ratio Std. Err. t P>|t| [95% Conf. Interval] -------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- female | female | 1.102489 .0537121 2.00 0.061 .9947957 1.22184 | dmdborn4 | born in US | 2.032748 .2472179 5.83 0.000 1.572707 2.62736 pad680 | 1.001926 .0001426 13.52 0.000 1.001625 1.002227 -------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- /cut1 | -1.528006 .1535442 -1.851956 -1.204056 /cut2 | -.3100434 .156401 -.6400207 .0199339 /cut3 | .8094935 .1349988 .524671 1.094316 /cut4 | 2.215668 .1222484 1.957747 2.47359 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Note: Estimates are transformed only in the first equation.

### Multinomial Logistic Regression

The outcome variable in a multinomial logistic regression has unordered categories. One of these categories must be selected as the base, or reference, category. A series of simultaneously estimated logistic regression are run, in which each category is the alternative to the base category. In the first call, we get regression coefficients in the metric of log-odds. In the second call, we request relative risk ratios with the **rrr** option. For more information about multinomial logistic regression, please see Stata Data Analysis Examples: Multinomial Logistic Regression and Stata Annotated Output: Multinomial Logistic Regression Although these pages show examples that use non-weighted data, they are still helpful because the interpretation of the coefficients is the same with weighted and non-weighted data.

svy: mlogit dmdmartl i.female i.dmdborn4 ridageyr(running mlogit on estimation sample) Survey: Multinomial logistic regression Number of strata = 14 Number of obs = 5,549 Number of PSUs = 31 Population size = 223,762,858 Design df = 17 F( 15, 3) = 154.71 Prob > F = 0.0007 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | Linearized dmdmartl | Coef. Std. Err. t P>|t| [95% Conf. Interval] --------------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- married | (base outcome) --------------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- widowed | female | female | 1.357308 .168816 8.04 0.000 1.001137 1.713478 | dmdborn4 | born in US | .0019271 .2086605 0.01 0.993 -.438308 .4421623 ridageyr | .1116445 .0084283 13.25 0.000 .0938623 .1294267 _cons | -10.02434 .6622772 -15.14 0.000 -11.42162 -8.627059 --------------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- divorced | female | female | .4469732 .1491499 3.00 0.008 .1322944 .7616521 | dmdborn4 | born in US | .7584749 .162126 4.68 0.000 .416419 1.100531 ridageyr | .0096327 .0040714 2.37 0.030 .0010429 .0182225 _cons | -3.00159 .2543555 -11.80 0.000 -3.538233 -2.464947 --------------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- separated | female | female | .4641578 .2019445 2.30 0.034 .0380921 .8902235 | dmdborn4 | born in US | -1.010353 .1878828 -5.38 0.000 -1.406751 -.6139551 ridageyr | -.0088637 .0046056 -1.92 0.071 -.0185807 .0008532 _cons | -2.212797 .2966892 -7.46 0.000 -2.838757 -1.586838 --------------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- never_married | female | female | -.398476 .0843935 -4.72 0.000 -.5765307 -.2204213 | dmdborn4 | born in US | .4267775 .1129206 3.78 0.001 .1885358 .6650193 ridageyr | -.0850085 .0084184 -10.10 0.000 -.1027698 -.0672473 _cons | 2.363903 .3308254 7.15 0.000 1.665922 3.061884 --------------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- living_with_partner | female | female | -.1411605 .0675459 -2.09 0.052 -.2836699 .001349 | dmdborn4 | born in US | -.0217679 .1111904 -0.20 0.847 -.2563591 .2128233 ridageyr | -.0553271 .0077755 -7.12 0.000 -.071732 -.0389222 _cons | .6739354 .3027322 2.23 0.040 .0352263 1.312645 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------mlogit, rrrSurvey: Multinomial logistic regression Number of strata = 14 Number of obs = 5,549 Number of PSUs = 31 Population size = 223,762,858 Design df = 17 F( 15, 3) = 154.71 Prob > F = 0.0007 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | Linearized dmdmartl | RRR Std. Err. t P>|t| [95% Conf. Interval] --------------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- married | (base outcome) --------------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- widowed | female | female | 3.885718 .6559715 8.04 0.000 2.721375 5.548227 | dmdborn4 | born in US | 1.001929 .209063 0.01 0.993 .645127 1.556068 ridageyr | 1.118115 .0094238 13.25 0.000 1.098408 1.138176 _cons | .0000443 .0000293 -15.14 0.000 .000011 .0001792 --------------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- divorced | female | female | 1.563572 .2332067 3.00 0.008 1.141444 2.141812 | dmdborn4 | born in US | 2.135018 .3461418 4.68 0.000 1.516521 3.005761 ridageyr | 1.009679 .0041108 2.37 0.030 1.001043 1.01839 _cons | .049708 .0126435 -11.80 0.000 .0290646 .0850134 --------------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- separated | female | female | 1.590674 .3212279 2.30 0.034 1.038827 2.435674 | dmdborn4 | born in US | .3640904 .0684063 -5.38 0.000 .2449378 .5412061 ridageyr | .9911755 .004565 -1.92 0.071 .9815909 1.000854 _cons | .1093942 .0324561 -7.46 0.000 .0584983 .2045715 --------------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- never_married | female | female | .6713424 .0566569 -4.72 0.000 .5618442 .8021808 | dmdborn4 | born in US | 1.532312 .1730296 3.78 0.001 1.20748 1.944528 ridageyr | .9185044 .0077323 -10.10 0.000 .9023346 .934964 _cons | 10.63237 3.517458 7.15 0.000 5.290551 21.36777 --------------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- living_with_partner | female | female | .86835 .0586535 -2.09 0.052 .7530151 1.00135 | dmdborn4 | born in US | .9784673 .1087961 -0.20 0.847 .773864 1.237166 ridageyr | .9461756 .007357 -7.12 0.000 .9307803 .9618255 _cons | 1.961943 .5939434 2.23 0.040 1.035854 3.715988 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Note: _cons estimates baseline relative risk for each outcome.

In the next example, we will change the base category to “never married”, which has a numerical value of 5.

svy: mlogit dmdmartl i.female i.dmdborn4 ridageyr, base(5)(running mlogit on estimation sample) Survey: Multinomial logistic regression Number of strata = 14 Number of obs = 5,549 Number of PSUs = 31 Population size = 223,762,858 Design df = 17 F( 15, 3) = 154.71 Prob > F = 0.0007 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | Linearized dmdmartl | Coef. Std. Err. t P>|t| [95% Conf. Interval] --------------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- married | female | female | .398476 .0843935 4.72 0.000 .2204213 .5765307 | dmdborn4 | born in US | -.4267775 .1129206 -3.78 0.001 -.6650193 -.1885358 ridageyr | .0850085 .0084184 10.10 0.000 .0672473 .1027698 _cons | -2.363903 .3308254 -7.15 0.000 -3.061884 -1.665922 --------------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- widowed | female | female | 1.755784 .1971662 8.91 0.000 1.339799 2.171768 | dmdborn4 | born in US | -.4248504 .2109377 -2.01 0.060 -.86989 .0201891 ridageyr | .196653 .0089714 21.92 0.000 .1777251 .215581 _cons | -12.38824 .5558984 -22.29 0.000 -13.56109 -11.2154 --------------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- divorced | female | female | .8454492 .1626544 5.20 0.000 .5022784 1.18862 | dmdborn4 | born in US | .3316974 .1990398 1.67 0.114 -.0882398 .7516346 ridageyr | .0946413 .0090581 10.45 0.000 .0755304 .1137521 _cons | -5.365493 .4196895 -12.78 0.000 -6.25096 -4.480025 --------------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- separated | female | female | .8626338 .2060073 4.19 0.001 .4279964 1.297271 | dmdborn4 | born in US | -1.437131 .1833229 -7.84 0.000 -1.823908 -1.050353 ridageyr | .0761448 .0089039 8.55 0.000 .0573593 .0949304 _cons | -4.5767 .5176634 -8.84 0.000 -5.668875 -3.484526 --------------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- never_married | (base outcome) --------------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- living_with_partner | female | female | .2573155 .113537 2.27 0.037 .0177734 .4968576 | dmdborn4 | born in US | -.4485455 .1331958 -3.37 0.004 -.729564 -.1675269 ridageyr | .0296815 .0096949 3.06 0.007 .0092269 .050136 _cons | -1.689968 .385004 -4.39 0.000 -2.502255 -.8776802 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Let’s add an interaction term to the model.

svy: mlogit dmdmartl i.female##i.dmdborn4 ridageyr, base(5)(running mlogit on estimation sample) Survey: Multinomial logistic regression Number of strata = 14 Number of obs = 5,549 Number of PSUs = 31 Population size = 223,762,858 Design df = 17 F( 17, 1) = . Prob > F = . ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | Linearized dmdmartl | Coef. Std. Err. t P>|t| [95% Conf. Interval] --------------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- married | female | female | .1003884 .1438395 0.70 0.495 -.2030863 .4038632 | dmdborn4 | born in US | -.5968325 .1346948 -4.43 0.000 -.8810136 -.3126514 | female#dmdborn4 | female#born in US | .3652957 .213228 1.71 0.105 -.0845761 .8151674 | ridageyr | .0851873 .0083587 10.19 0.000 .0675519 .1028227 _cons | -2.232335 .3430988 -6.51 0.000 -2.95621 -1.50846 --------------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- widowed | female | female | 1.779204 .2723828 6.53 0.000 1.204526 2.353881 | dmdborn4 | born in US | -.3339547 .3218789 -1.04 0.314 -1.01306 .3451505 | female#dmdborn4 | female#born in US | -.0091055 .3663452 -0.02 0.980 -.7820264 .7638154 | ridageyr | .1968776 .0089084 22.10 0.000 .1780826 .2156727 _cons | -12.48612 .5000783 -24.97 0.000 -13.5412 -11.43105 --------------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- divorced | female | female | 1.113447 .3127748 3.56 0.002 .4535501 1.773344 | dmdborn4 | born in US | .5648089 .3206244 1.76 0.096 -.1116494 1.241267 | female#dmdborn4 | female#born in US | -.2706462 .3672125 -0.74 0.471 -1.045397 .5041044 | ridageyr | .0947758 .0090431 10.48 0.000 .0756966 .1138551 _cons | -5.5948 .4459803 -12.54 0.000 -6.535736 -4.653864 --------------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- separated | female | female | .7043941 .4025168 1.75 0.098 -.1448421 1.55363 | dmdborn4 | born in US | -1.504133 .3361909 -4.47 0.000 -2.213434 -.7948321 | female#dmdborn4 | female#born in US | .1754885 .5953786 0.29 0.772 -1.08065 1.431628 | ridageyr | .0762562 .0089172 8.55 0.000 .0574425 .09507 _cons | -4.516683 .5152722 -8.77 0.000 -5.603812 -3.429553 --------------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- never_married | (base outcome) --------------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- living_with_partner | female | female | .036999 .2187397 0.17 0.868 -.4245014 .4984994 | dmdborn4 | born in US | -.568658 .1960396 -2.90 0.010 -.9822654 -.1550506 | female#dmdborn4 | female#born in US | .2687737 .292348 0.92 0.371 -.3480266 .885574 | ridageyr | .0298384 .0096943 3.08 0.007 .0093853 .0502915 _cons | -1.597323 .3927349 -4.07 0.001 -2.425921 -.7687246 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Notice that when we include the interaction term, we do not get an F-statistic or a p-value for the overall model. What happened, and how worried should we be?

The issue is caused by the degrees of freedom. You might think that because we have so many observations in this dataset that we could run a model with many predictors and not run out of degrees of freedom, but that is not the case. A great explanation of the problem can be found in the Stata j_robustsingular help file that you can access by clicking on the blue in the Stata output (if you run this example) or by typing **help j_robustsingular** in the Stata command window.

The numerator degrees of freedom is determined by the number of constraints (called k); the denominator degrees of freedom is calculated as d-k+1, where d is the number of PSUs minus the number of strata. The value of d is given in top portion of the Stata output and is labeled Design df. We can see from the output that k = 17, but why is it 17 when we have 20 parameters (four 1 df parameters in five equations)? Stata set this value to 17 because it is the maximum number of constraints that could be simultaneously tested. The denominator degrees of freedom is calculated as 17 – 17 + 1 = 1.

Despite not getting an F-statistic for the overall model, the parameters are still estimated correctly. However, we should consider the standard errors. The theory justifying the calculation of the standard errors assumes a large number of clusters minus strata, and we just saw that we are trying to estimate more than we have. If the standard errors are suspect, then so are the test statistics and their p-values.

The upshot of this is that we can have at most 16 constraints across all of the equations, which means three 1 df predictors, because we have five equations (3 X 5 = 15 < 16). Because of this, for purposes of illustration, we will drop the variable **ridageyr** from our list of predictors, even though it is statistically significant.

svy: mlogit dmdmartl i.female##i.dmdborn4, base(5)(running mlogit on estimation sample) Survey: Multinomial logistic regression Number of strata = 14 Number of obs = 5,549 Number of PSUs = 31 Population size = 223,762,858 Design df = 17 F( 15, 3) = 34.75 Prob > F = 0.0069 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | Linearized dmdmartl | Coef. Std. Err. t P>|t| [95% Conf. Interval] --------------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- married | female | female | .1183387 .1517903 0.78 0.446 -.2019108 .4385883 | dmdborn4 | born in US | -.3006455 .1371932 -2.19 0.043 -.5900978 -.0111932 | female#dmdborn4 | female#born in US | .2041983 .201896 1.01 0.326 -.2217649 .6301615 | _cons | 1.095878 .1270625 8.62 0.000 .8277996 1.363956 --------------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- widowed | female | female | 1.680626 .2781693 6.04 0.000 1.09374 2.267512 | dmdborn4 | born in US | .4168569 .2545828 1.64 0.120 -.1202658 .9539796 | female#dmdborn4 | female#born in US | -.1509306 .3705515 -0.41 0.689 -.9327259 .6308647 | _cons | -2.579307 .2107986 -12.24 0.000 -3.024053 -2.134561 --------------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- divorced | female | female | 1.126068 .3105071 3.63 0.002 .4709557 1.781181 | dmdborn4 | born in US | .9131768 .2837044 3.22 0.005 .3146128 1.511741 | female#dmdborn4 | female#born in US | -.4421007 .3309126 -1.34 0.199 -1.140265 .2560638 | _cons | -1.808367 .2627419 -6.88 0.000 -2.362704 -1.25403 --------------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- separated | female | female | .7256508 .4071373 1.78 0.093 -.1333338 1.584635 | dmdborn4 | born in US | -1.255096 .3453054 -3.63 0.002 -1.983627 -.5265654 | female#dmdborn4 | female#born in US | .026551 .6028027 0.04 0.965 -1.245252 1.298353 | _cons | -1.597227 .2962692 -5.39 0.000 -2.2223 -.9721533 --------------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- never_married | (base outcome) --------------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- living_with_partner | female | female | .0529201 .2216185 0.24 0.814 -.4146541 .5204943 | dmdborn4 | born in US | -.5093796 .1891849 -2.69 0.015 -.9085248 -.1102344 | female#dmdborn4 | female#born in US | .2080791 .2854279 0.73 0.476 -.3941212 .8102795 | _cons | -.5582705 .1787538 -3.12 0.006 -.9354081 -.1811328 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

We will use the **contrast** command to see if the interaction term is statistically significant across all of the equations.

contrast female#dmdborn4Contrasts of marginal linear predictions Design df = 17 Margins : asbalanced --------------------------------------------------- | df F P>F ----------------+---------------------------------- married | female#dmdborn4 | 1 1.02 0.3260 Design | 17 --------------------------------------------------- Note: F statistics are adjusted for the survey design.

The p-value is 0.3260, so the interaction term is not statistically significant (at the alpha = .05) across all equations. Although the interaction is not statistically significant, we can still use the **margins** command to have a look at the predicted probabilities. As you can see, the predicted probabilities are very similar within each equation, which is what we expect given that the interaction is not statistically significant.

margins female#dmdborn4, vce(unconditional)Adjusted predictions Number of obs = 5,549 1._predict : Pr(dmdmartl==married), predict(pr outcome(1)) 2._predict : Pr(dmdmartl==widowed), predict(pr outcome(2)) 3._predict : Pr(dmdmartl==divorced), predict(pr outcome(3)) 4._predict : Pr(dmdmartl==separated), predict(pr outcome(4)) 5._predict : Pr(dmdmartl==never_married), predict(pr outcome(5)) 6._predict : Pr(dmdmartl==living_with_partner), predict(pr outcome(6)) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | Linearized | Margin Std. Err. t P>|t| [95% Conf. Interval] -------------------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- _predict#female#dmdborn4 | 1#male#born elsewhere | .5976192 .022827 26.18 0.000 .5494584 .6457801 1#male#born in US | .5350065 .0271931 19.67 0.000 .477634 .5923789 1#female#born elsewhere | .5343956 .026285 20.33 0.000 .4789391 .5898522 1#female#born in US | .5124434 .0204501 25.06 0.000 .4692973 .5555894 2#male#born elsewhere | .0151465 .0030299 5.00 0.000 .0087539 .0215391 2#male#born in US | .0277878 .0035675 7.79 0.000 .020261 .0353146 2#female#born elsewhere | .0646016 .0089016 7.26 0.000 .0458208 .0833823 2#female#born in US | .0890027 .006891 12.92 0.000 .0744639 .1035414 3#male#born elsewhere | .0327436 .007994 4.10 0.001 .0158778 .0496095 3#male#born in US | .0986774 .0122991 8.02 0.000 .0727287 .1246262 3#female#born elsewhere | .0802078 .0108933 7.36 0.000 .0572251 .1031906 3#female#born in US | .1356663 .0106923 12.69 0.000 .1131075 .1582252 4#male#born elsewhere | .0404412 .0097088 4.17 0.001 .0199574 .060925 4#male#born in US | .0139395 .0032575 4.28 0.001 .0070667 .0208122 4#female#born elsewhere | .0663766 .0121832 5.45 0.000 .0406724 .0920808 4#female#born in US | .0205179 .0045573 4.50 0.000 .0109028 .0301331 5#male#born elsewhere | .1997518 .0200541 9.96 0.000 .1574414 .2420623 5#male#born in US | .2415427 .0305424 7.91 0.000 .1771039 .3059815 5#female#born elsewhere | .1586848 .02753 5.76 0.000 .1006016 .216768 5#female#born in US | .1675733 .0216525 7.74 0.000 .1218906 .213256 6#male#born elsewhere | .1142976 .0148556 7.69 0.000 .0829549 .1456402 6#male#born in US | .0830461 .0073496 11.30 0.000 .0675398 .0985525 6#female#born elsewhere | .0957336 .014004 6.84 0.000 .0661877 .1252795 6#female#born in US | .0747964 .0068146 10.98 0.000 .0604189 .0891739 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------marginsplot

### Count Models

Both Poisson and negative binomial models can be used with complex survey data. We will start with a simple Poisson model with a single binary predictor. We will then investigate the plausibility that the conditional variance is approximately equal to the condition mean. For more information regarding Poisson models, please see Stata Data Analysis Examples: Poisson Regression and Stata Annotated Output: Poisson Regression. For more information regarding negative binomial models, please see Stata Data Analysis Examples: Negative Binomial Regression and Stata Annotated Output: Negative Binomial Regression.

svy: poisson pad675 i.female(running poisson on estimation sample) Survey: Poisson regression Number of strata = 14 Number of obs = 2,887 Number of PSUs = 31 Population size = 121,973,544 Design df = 17 F( 1, 17) = 53.89 Prob > F = 0.0000 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | Linearized pad675 | Coef. Std. Err. t P>|t| [95% Conf. Interval] -------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- female | female | -.2714819 .0369815 -7.34 0.000 -.349506 -.1934579 _cons | 4.34112 .0348709 124.49 0.000 4.267549 4.414692 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------svy: mean pad675(running mean on estimation sample) Survey: Mean estimation Number of strata = 14 Number of obs = 2,887 Number of PSUs = 31 Population size = 121,973,544 Design df = 17 -------------------------------------------------------------- | Linearized | Mean Std. Err. [95% Conf. Interval] -------------+------------------------------------------------ pad675 | 67.3715 1.665661 63.85726 70.88574 --------------------------------------------------------------estat sd------------------------------------- | Mean Std. Dev. -------------+----------------------- pad675 | 67.3715 59.20373 -------------------------------------di (59.20373)^23505.0816svy: mean pad675, over(female)(running mean on estimation sample) Survey: Mean estimation Number of strata = 14 Number of obs = 2,887 Number of PSUs = 31 Population size = 121,973,544 Design df = 17 male: female = male female: female = female -------------------------------------------------------------- | Linearized Over | Mean Std. Err. [95% Conf. Interval] -------------+------------------------------------------------ pad675 | male | 76.79352 2.677863 71.14373 82.44332 female | 58.53579 1.326453 55.73722 61.33436 --------------------------------------------------------------estat sdmale: female = male female: female = female ------------------------------------- Over | Mean Std. Dev. -------------+----------------------- pad675 | male | 76.79352 70.07179 female | 58.53579 46.17294 -------------------------------------

It seems that we have overdispersion, which is quite common in count models. Let’s try a negative binomial model. Notice that no test of the alpha parameter being equal to 0 is given, as it is when this analysis is run with unweighted data.

svy: nbreg pad675 i.female(running nbreg on estimation sample) Survey: Negative binomial regression Number of strata = 14 Number of obs = 2,887 Number of PSUs = 31 Population size = 121,973,544 Design df = 17 F( 1, 17) = 53.89 Dispersion = mean Prob > F = 0.0000 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | Linearized pad675 | Coef. Std. Err. t P>|t| [95% Conf. Interval] -------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- female | female | -.2714819 .0369815 -7.34 0.000 -.349506 -.1934579 _cons | 4.34112 .0348709 124.49 0.000 4.267549 4.414692 -------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- /lnalpha | -.7208759 .0356206 -.7960289 -.6457229 -------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- alpha | .4863261 .0173232 .4511169 .5242834 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------margins female, vce(unconditional)Adjusted predictions Number of obs = 2,887 Expression : Predicted number of events, predict() ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | Linearized | Margin Std. Err. t P>|t| [95% Conf. Interval] -------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- female | male | 76.79353 2.677863 28.68 0.000 71.14373 82.44333 female | 58.5358 1.326453 44.13 0.000 55.73722 61.33437 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Let’s try including an interaction between **female** and age (**ridageyr**).

svy: nbreg pad675 i.female##c.ridageyr(running nbreg on estimation sample) Survey: Negative binomial regression Number of strata = 14 Number of obs = 2,887 Number of PSUs = 31 Population size = 121,973,544 Design df = 17 F( 3, 15) = 17.61 Dispersion = mean Prob > F = 0.0000 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | Linearized pad675 | Coef. Std. Err. t P>|t| [95% Conf. Interval] ------------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- female | female | -.2455241 .1069486 -2.30 0.035 -.4711659 -.0198824 ridageyr | -.0001887 .0023006 -0.08 0.936 -.0050424 .0046651 | female#c.ridageyr | female | -.0006187 .0026713 -0.23 0.820 -.0062547 .0050173 | _cons | 4.34873 .0895025 48.59 0.000 4.159896 4.537563 ------------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- /lnalpha | -.7210909 .035793 -.7966074 -.6455743 ------------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- alpha | .4862216 .0174033 .4508559 .5243613 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Although the interaction term is not statistically significant, we can still use the **margins** command to get the predicted counts.

margins female, at(ridageyr=(20(10)60)) vce(unconditional)Adjusted predictions Number of obs = 2,887 Expression : Predicted number of events, predict() 1._at : ridageyr = 20 2._at : ridageyr = 30 3._at : ridageyr = 40 4._at : ridageyr = 50 5._at : ridageyr = 60 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | Linearized | Margin Std. Err. t P>|t| [95% Conf. Interval] -------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- _at#female | 1#male | 77.08864 3.846604 20.04 0.000 68.97301 85.20426 1#female | 59.56436 2.47305 24.09 0.000 54.34668 64.78204 2#male | 76.94332 2.792532 27.55 0.000 71.05159 82.83504 2#female | 59.08537 1.781162 33.17 0.000 55.32745 62.84329 3#male | 76.79827 2.663778 28.83 0.000 71.17819 82.41835 3#female | 58.61023 1.362563 43.01 0.000 55.73548 61.48499 4#male | 76.6535 3.552176 21.58 0.000 69.15906 84.14793 4#female | 58.13892 1.446417 40.20 0.000 55.08724 61.19059 5#male | 76.509 4.928961 15.52 0.000 66.1098 86.9082 5#female | 57.67139 1.950799 29.56 0.000 53.55557 61.78722 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------marginsplot // two parallel lines

## For more information on using the NHANES data sets

There are helpful resources for learning how to analyze the NHANES data sets correctly. One is a listserv at http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nhanes/nhanes_listserv.htm . There are also online tutorials at http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/tutorials/index.htm .

## References

Applied Survey Data Analysis, Second Edition by Steven G. Heeringa, Brady T. West, and Patricia A. Berglund

A survey of survey statistics: What is done and can be done in Stata by Frauke Kreuter and Richard Valliant, The Stata Journal (2007), Volume 7, Number 1, pages 1-21.

Goodness-of-fit test for a logistic regression model fitted using survey sample data by Kellie J. Archer and Stanley Lemeshow, The Stata Journal (2006), Volume 6, Number 1, pages 97-105.

Analysis of Health Surveys by Edward L. Korn and Barry I. Graubard

Sampling of Populations: Methods and Applications, Fourth Edition by Paul Levy and Stanley Lemeshow

Analysis of Survey Data Edited by R. L. Chambers and C. J. Skinner

Sampling Techniques, Third Edition by William G. Cochran

Stata 15 Manual: Survey Data

StatNews #73: Overlapping Confidence Intervals and Statistical Significance, October 2008 by the Cornell Statistical Consulting Unit

Why Overlapping Confidence Intervals Mean Nothing about Statistical Significance