<?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: pearson partial correlation with PROC CORR and PROC GLM in Statistical Procedures</title>
    <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/pearson-partial-correlation-with-PROC-CORR-and-PROC-GLM/m-p/750909#M36505</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;thanks. it has been resolved after i put both variables on the left of the model statement for GLM&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Tue, 29 Jun 2021 06:05:09 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Sandrapharma</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2021-06-29T06:05:09Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>pearson partial correlation with PROC CORR and PROC GLM</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/pearson-partial-correlation-with-PROC-CORR-and-PROC-GLM/m-p/750335#M36489</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I am trying to calculate the pearson partial correlation between continuous variables, x and y adjusted by continuous variable z. based on this article&amp;nbsp;&lt;A href="https://www.lexjansen.com/pharmasug/2010/SP/SP01.pdf," target="_blank"&gt;https://www.lexjansen.com/pharmasug/2010/SP/SP01.pdf,&lt;/A&gt;&amp;nbsp;the following two procedure will give the same results (Pearson correlation from PROC CORR will be the same as the sqrt(R Square) from PROC GLM. However, I always got different results. I am wondering why and which one I should use to calculate the partial correlation.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;PROC CORR data = adqol;&lt;BR /&gt;var y;&lt;BR /&gt;with x;&lt;BR /&gt;partial z ;&lt;BR /&gt;run;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;PROC GLM data=adqol;&lt;BR /&gt;model y = x z;&lt;BR /&gt;manova / printE;&lt;BR /&gt;run;&lt;BR /&gt;quit;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 Jun 2021 21:11:41 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/pearson-partial-correlation-with-PROC-CORR-and-PROC-GLM/m-p/750335#M36489</guid>
      <dc:creator>Sandrapharma</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-06-24T21:11:41Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: pearson partial correlation with PROC CORR and PROC GLM</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/pearson-partial-correlation-with-PROC-CORR-and-PROC-GLM/m-p/750337#M36490</link>
      <description>&lt;BLOCKQUOTE&gt;&lt;HR /&gt;&lt;a href="https://communities.sas.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/387261"&gt;@Sandrapharma&lt;/a&gt;&amp;nbsp;wrote:&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;P&gt;I am trying to calculate the pearson partial correlation between continuous variables, x and y adjusted by continuous variable z. based on this article&amp;nbsp;&lt;A href="https://www.lexjansen.com/pharmasug/2010/SP/SP01.pdf," target="_blank" rel="noopener"&gt;https://www.lexjansen.com/pharmasug/2010/SP/SP01.pdf,&lt;/A&gt;&amp;nbsp;the following two procedure will give the same results (Pearson correlation from PROC CORR will be the same as the sqrt(R Square) from PROC GLM. However, I always got different results. I am wondering why and which one I should use to calculate the partial correlation.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;HR /&gt;&lt;/BLOCKQUOTE&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Show us the results.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 Jun 2021 21:15:09 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/pearson-partial-correlation-with-PROC-CORR-and-PROC-GLM/m-p/750337#M36490</guid>
      <dc:creator>PaigeMiller</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-06-24T21:15:09Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: pearson partial correlation with PROC CORR and PROC GLM</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/pearson-partial-correlation-with-PROC-CORR-and-PROC-GLM/m-p/750405#M36491</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I don't think your PROC GLM step is correct. You need to put both variables on the left hand side of the MODEL statement. Try this:&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;PRE&gt;&lt;CODE class=" language-sas"&gt;PROC CORR data = sashelp.class;
var Weight;
with Height;
partial Age;
run;

PROC GLM data=sashelp.class plots=none;
model Weight Height = Age;
manova / printE;
run;
quit;&lt;/CODE&gt;&lt;/PRE&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 25 Jun 2021 10:09:39 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/pearson-partial-correlation-with-PROC-CORR-and-PROC-GLM/m-p/750405#M36491</guid>
      <dc:creator>Rick_SAS</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-06-25T10:09:39Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: pearson partial correlation with PROC CORR and PROC GLM</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/pearson-partial-correlation-with-PROC-CORR-and-PROC-GLM/m-p/750909#M36505</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;thanks. it has been resolved after i put both variables on the left of the model statement for GLM&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 29 Jun 2021 06:05:09 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/pearson-partial-correlation-with-PROC-CORR-and-PROC-GLM/m-p/750909#M36505</guid>
      <dc:creator>Sandrapharma</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-06-29T06:05:09Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

