3-level model (binary outcome) PreviousNext
Mplus Discussion > Multilevel Data/Complex Sample >
Message/Author
 Emily Blood posted on Friday, March 18, 2011 - 1:18 pm
I have a three-level dataset:
reports (1-7 "pa" reports per event)
events (1-29 "condom" events per indiv)
individual (49 individuals)
report is continuous, event is binary.
I need to use the univariate format and cluster statement since there are varying numbers of reports per event and varying number of events per individual. I can 1.) run using indiv as the cluster, BUT this incorrectly assumes that each report is indep w/in indiv (1-7 reports per event all refer to the same event).
%WITHIN% condom on pa;
%BETWEEN% condom on age gender;
2.)I can assume a cluster of indiv*event, this appropriately assumes relationship among reports from the same event within individual. BUT, I cannot have the relationship b/t event and report be non-linear (logit), the relationship between the event and the individual intercept be non-linear (logit) and the relationship between the continuous individual intercept and the individual-level covariates be linear which is what I want. I get errors that say the threshold should be at the between level as well. Any suggestions? here is what I tried that gives errors.
%WITHIN%
fpa by pa@1;
condom on fpa;
[condom$1@0];
%BETWEEN%
condom on age gender;
[condom@0];
 Bengt O. Muthen posted on Friday, March 18, 2011 - 1:48 pm
I think it is ok to have varying number of reports per event - why not use a wide, 7-variable format where many have missing data on some reports? That would make it a two-level model.
 Emily Blood posted on Friday, March 18, 2011 - 4:37 pm
I thought that if I had 7 report ("pa") variables and for most observations some were missing that in the wide, multivariate format the whole observation is dropped. So, if an event only had 6 reports, pa7 would be missing and therefor the observation would be dropped. If this is not the case, I will do that. That would be great. Please let me know.
Thank you for your response!
Emily
 Bengt O. Muthen posted on Friday, March 18, 2011 - 4:51 pm
You have a factor influencing the pa's, so the pa's are DVs. People are not dropped due to missing on DVs.
Back to top
Add Your Message Here
Post:
Username: Posting Information:
This is a private posting area. Only registered users and moderators may post messages here.
Password:
Options: Enable HTML code in message
Automatically activate URLs in message
Action: