Class variable and interaction in PROC MIXED

[sadiekasso]

Hey All,

I'm having some confusion running a repeated measures regression model in SAS proc mixed and hoping to get some help. I'm trying to determine whether or not I need to include the dichotomous variable in the interaction term (shown in the model below) in my Class line and why when I do so, I only get results for one level of the dichotomous variable.  Here is the model :

proc mixed data =   ks_adh.CPTII_sts_fixed_lbdi_cent;

class patno session sex;

model bdi = lbdi_cent sitenum F1_cpt3_Mean_cent_resid|sex   /s covb CL;

repeated session  / type=un subject = patno ;

run;

In the model = BDI is a continuous variable and represents patients scores on a depressive symptom measure at their 2nd,3rd,4th, and 5th sessions of treatment (or their next session BDI score). We are predicting this from : (1) The main effect of their BDI score at the current session (sessions 1,2,3,4) , the main effect of site, main effect of ratings of therapists use of cognitive methods at the current session (sessions 1,2,3,4- represented by the F1_cpt3_Mean_cent_resid variable), the main effect of patients sex, and the interaction of cognitive methods at each current session and patient sex. If I include sex in the class statement - in the output window, solutions for Fixed effects are only available for one level of SEX as shown here:

                                        Solution for Fixed Effects

Effect                                     sex     Estimate       Error      DF    t Value    Pr > |t|     Alpha

sitenum                                             -0.4326      0.4830      54      -0.90      0.3744      0.05

F1_cpt3_Mean_cent_re                        -0.1276      1.5644      54      -0.08      0.9353      0.05

sex                                         -0.5      0.2167      0.4812      54       0.45      0.6543      0.05

sex                                          0.5           0           .       .        .         .             .

F1_cpt3_Mean_cen*sex            -0.5     -6.0599      2.1393      54      -2.83      0.0065      0.05

F1_cpt3_Mean_cen*sex              0.5           0           .       .        .         .             .

Does anyone know why solutions don't appear for the .5 level of the sex variable?

Beyond this, is it necessary that I include sex in the class  statement? It's important to note, that I am going to plug the estimates derived from these analyses into the Johnson-Neyman tool for probing interactions: Two-Way Interaction Effects in MLR  in order to determine the simple slope of the F1 variable at each level of sex . Given this, should the estimates for fixed effects and the variance/covariances that I plug into the JN calculator be from a model that DOES include sex in the class statement? or from a model that does NOT include sex in the class statement. Simple slopes generated differ drastically among the two approaches. Any help at all or tips would be greatly appreciated!

[sadiekasso]

Just to give an update= After playing around with things, I noticed that when the main fixed effects of SEX and F1_cpt3_Mean_cent_re are NOT included in the model (but the interaction term is ) I do get results for both levels of the Sex variable (see model below):

proc mixed data =   ks_adh.CPTII_sts_fixed_lbdi_cent;

class patno session sex;

model bdi = lbdi_cent sitenum  F1_cpt3_Mean_cent_resid*sex   /s covb CL;

repeated session  / type=un subject = patno ;

run;

RESULTS:

                                     Solution for Fixed Effects

                                                     Standard

Effect                  sex     Estimate       Error      DF    t Value    Pr > |t|     Alpha

Intercept                        24.0615      0.2226      55     108.12      <.0001      0.05

lbdi_cent                         0.9774     0.02413      55      40.51      <.0001      0.05

sitenum                          -0.4730      0.4603      55      -1.03      0.3086      0.05

F1_cpt3_Mean_cen*sex    -0.5     -6.1841      1.4618      55      -4.23      <.0001      0.05

F1_cpt3_Mean_cen*sex     0.5     -0.1531      1.5656      55      -0.10      0.9224      0.05

HOWEVER, when the main effects AND the interaction are included ( as they were in the model I originally posted about) I do NOT get results for both levels of sex (see model and results above) . Anyone know why this is the case? and how I could get the results for the main effects AND both levels of my Sex and Sex by F1 interaction? This would solve all of my problems! thanks

[SteveDenham · Accepted solution]

When main effects and interactions are included in a model, the solution vector (by default) sets the last value to zero to avoid a singular matrix.  All other values need to be thought of as deviations from the intercept or overall slope as appropriate.

I see that you are treating sitenum as a continuous variable as well, so you have a multiple regression situation, where data imbalance will make estimates differ when alternative models are fit.

In any case, the last version of the output fits separate slopes, but a common intercept, by sex for f1_cpt3_mean_cen.  The first fits separate sloptes, and separate deviations from the overall intercept, by sex for this regression.

Steve Denham