For the delta deviance influence diagnostic in logistic regression ddeviance from predict (using v 14 right now, but I don’t think that this has changed), it seems that Stata uses formula #5.26 in Hosmer, et.al. (2013). Formula 5.26 is stated to be an "approximation" if the subject's Pearson residual is substituted for the deviance residual from the prior stated formula. However, Minitab uses the formula without this substitution (just prior, but unnumbered in the Hosmer text). These formulas produce somewhat different values, and I am trying to understand the logic of Stata on this choice.
Thanks for any enlightenment you might offer!
John
Related Posts with ddeviance result differs from Minitab
Questions on mcartestHello, I am trying to test if my data are missing completely at random (MCAR) by using the mcartest…
Creating new var w/ multiple values of another varHello, I have two variables, IS and Code. I would like IS to take on different values depending on w…
Deleting the letter part of a string variable and keep only the numeric partHello you all, I`m very glad to be part of this forum that has already helped me a lot these recent …
Time Fixed Effects with Interaction: What is the reference?Hi everyone, hope you having a great week. I'm having trouble reading the following xtreg output. I…
Using a Dataset as VarlistI'm trying to use one data set as the reference list to replace values in another. I suspect the cod…
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
0 Response to ddeviance result differs from Minitab
Post a Comment