<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: Is geomean appropriate here? in SAS Procedures</title>
    <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/SAS-Procedures/Is-geomean-appropriate-here/m-p/563852#M74986</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;I am basing these methods off of a paper that says they 'performed a log conversion and report results following back-transformation'. At first I assumed that meant geometric mean but now I do not think so. Does that just mean they completed the analyses on log-tranformed variables but reported the means un-tranformed?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I do not think the geometric mean is what I should be using here after all. Adding a value to the variable dramatically changes the geometric mean. So for example adding .00001 gives me a geomean of 3.55 (SE 0.05) while adding 1 gives me a geomean of 6.13 (SE 0.04). The smaller the constant, the smaller the geomean. This would make sense since the geometric mean of x, y, z = sqrt(x*y*z). But I cannot see a way to determine what constant to add.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Wed, 05 Jun 2019 19:39:57 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>gekco</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2019-06-05T19:39:57Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Is geomean appropriate here?</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/SAS-Procedures/Is-geomean-appropriate-here/m-p/563024#M74970</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I am looking at a highly skewed variable where most values are clustered around 3-12 but values range from 0-350. When I log-transform the variable it almost fits a normal distribution. I would like to perform and log conversion and back-transformation when reporting the mean. My code is:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;proc surveymeans data=work.test geomean;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;var ex;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;run;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;When I run this code after removing all 0 values I get a number that looks like what I would expect. The problem is when I try to run it on all values of the variable, I get an error message saying 'a variable must be positive when geometric mean is requested'. Can I get around that by adding 1 to all values of the variable?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 31 May 2019 21:06:29 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/SAS-Procedures/Is-geomean-appropriate-here/m-p/563024#M74970</guid>
      <dc:creator>gekco</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-05-31T21:06:29Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Is geomean appropriate here?</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/SAS-Procedures/Is-geomean-appropriate-here/m-p/563221#M74971</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Yes, you can. See &lt;A href="https://blogs.sas.com/content/iml/2011/04/27/log-transformations-how-to-handle-negative-data-values.html" target="_self"&gt;"Log transformations: How to handle zero values."&amp;nbsp;&lt;/A&gt;Physically, you are changing the measurement definition. For example, instead of a count, you are no measuring "one more than the count."&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;I always encourage analysts to ask whether the LOG transformation is the best to use. For example, the square-root transformation is also a normalizing transformation but preserves the value of zero.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 03 Jun 2019 10:29:18 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/SAS-Procedures/Is-geomean-appropriate-here/m-p/563221#M74971</guid>
      <dc:creator>Rick_SAS</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-06-03T10:29:18Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Is geomean appropriate here?</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/SAS-Procedures/Is-geomean-appropriate-here/m-p/563852#M74986</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I am basing these methods off of a paper that says they 'performed a log conversion and report results following back-transformation'. At first I assumed that meant geometric mean but now I do not think so. Does that just mean they completed the analyses on log-tranformed variables but reported the means un-tranformed?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I do not think the geometric mean is what I should be using here after all. Adding a value to the variable dramatically changes the geometric mean. So for example adding .00001 gives me a geomean of 3.55 (SE 0.05) while adding 1 gives me a geomean of 6.13 (SE 0.04). The smaller the constant, the smaller the geomean. This would make sense since the geometric mean of x, y, z = sqrt(x*y*z). But I cannot see a way to determine what constant to add.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 05 Jun 2019 19:39:57 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/SAS-Procedures/Is-geomean-appropriate-here/m-p/563852#M74986</guid>
      <dc:creator>gekco</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-06-05T19:39:57Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

