<?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 Alternative of proc glm? in Statistical Procedures</title>
    <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Alternative-of-proc-glm/m-p/62195#M2917</link>
    <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;This occurs when you have class variable. In GLM (and in MIXED, and many other procedures), an over-parameterized model is used, where there is a parameter for every level of the class (factor) variable. WHen there is an intercept in the model (the default), this is one more parameter than needed to model the data. The generalized inverse essentially makes the 'last' parameter 0. By itself, this is fine. For a situation with X1 (3 levels), for instance, the mean Y is the intercept plus the parameter for the level of X1. WIth the listed constraint, this means that the mean for the last level of X1 is intercept + 0 = intercept. The SAS User's Guides gives great details on this topic (a vast topic).&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Fri, 09 Sep 2011 21:18:37 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>lvm</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2011-09-09T21:18:37Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Alternative of proc glm?</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Alternative-of-proc-glm/m-p/62194#M2916</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Dear all&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I' m running a model with proc glm to fit a multiple regression.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Y = score 's questionnaire (to measure quality of life)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;X1 = treatment&amp;nbsp; (value a, b, c)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;X2= age (continuos)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;X3= education (low and high)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;X4= gendere (Male, Female)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;X5=BMI (continuos)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;There's no multicollinearity&amp;nbsp; between covariates&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The code is:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;proc glm data=mydataset;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; class X1 X3 X4;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; model Y= X1 X2 X3 X4 X5 /solution;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;run;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;In the output tables with parameter estimate there's a footnote:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN lang="EN-US" style="font-family: 'Tahoma','sans-serif'; color: black; font-size: 9.5pt;"&gt;The X'X matrix has been found to be singular, and a generalized inverse was used to solve the normal equations.&amp;nbsp; Terms whose estimates are followed by the letter 'B' are not uniquely estimable.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN lang="EN-US" style="font-family: 'Tahoma','sans-serif'; color: black; font-size: 9.5pt;"&gt; &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN lang="EN-US" style="font-family: 'Tahoma','sans-serif'; color: black; font-size: 9.5pt;"&gt;What's the meaning? &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;SPAN lang="EN-US" style="font-family: 'Tahoma','sans-serif'; color: black; font-size: 9.5pt;"&gt;The results validity are questionable?&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN lang="EN-US" style="font-family: 'Tahoma','sans-serif'; color: black; font-size: 9.5pt;"&gt; &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN lang="EN-US" style="font-family: 'Tahoma','sans-serif'; color: black; font-size: 9.5pt;"&gt;Is it recommend to run a different model? What kind of model?&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN lang="EN-US" style="font-family: 'Tahoma','sans-serif'; color: black; font-size: 9.5pt;"&gt; &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN lang="EN-US" style="font-family: 'Tahoma','sans-serif'; color: black; font-size: 9.5pt;"&gt;Thanks in advance&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN lang="EN-US" style="font-family: 'Tahoma','sans-serif'; color: black; font-size: 9.5pt;"&gt; &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN lang="EN-US" style="font-family: 'Tahoma','sans-serif'; color: black; font-size: 9.5pt;"&gt; &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 Sep 2011 07:00:51 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Alternative-of-proc-glm/m-p/62194#M2916</guid>
      <dc:creator>L_L</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2011-09-09T07:00:51Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Alternative of proc glm?</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Alternative-of-proc-glm/m-p/62195#M2917</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;This occurs when you have class variable. In GLM (and in MIXED, and many other procedures), an over-parameterized model is used, where there is a parameter for every level of the class (factor) variable. WHen there is an intercept in the model (the default), this is one more parameter than needed to model the data. The generalized inverse essentially makes the 'last' parameter 0. By itself, this is fine. For a situation with X1 (3 levels), for instance, the mean Y is the intercept plus the parameter for the level of X1. WIth the listed constraint, this means that the mean for the last level of X1 is intercept + 0 = intercept. The SAS User's Guides gives great details on this topic (a vast topic).&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 Sep 2011 21:18:37 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Alternative-of-proc-glm/m-p/62195#M2917</guid>
      <dc:creator>lvm</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2011-09-09T21:18:37Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

