Sorry see attached Marco with stimulation data , please ignore previous one  ... View more

I apologies, i made some change in macro so it was giving error. I attached now corrected one.   I agree it gives warning  "WARNING: Division by zero, result set to missing value.",     ... View more

Pls see attachment of SAS code, suppose I have zero responder in strata 2 then "proc freq" unable to provide Newcombe confidence limit with note that, " NOTE: Newcombe confidence limits for the common risk difference cannot be computed for this table (Treatment by Responder controlling for startum) due to zero-frequency rows, columns, or cells."   However if I use that macro then I gets values for CI for Newcombe .    Please help why it is happening from SAS, why SAS is giving results, it is due to CI is not reliable even it is calculable ?        ... View more

I wanted to understand from below formula where cause issue, if L2 and U2 are zero due to zero responder in strata 2, but we have values for L1 and U1 so if we include in Below L and U still you can Lower and Upper, but I am not sure whether it reliable or not.    You could refer below paper (SAS macro) where it provides the Stratified Newcombe confidence limit with zero responder in one of strata. But I am not sure how reliable it is, that could reason SAS is not showing results in such cases (where zero responder in one of strata)    https://www.pharmasug.org/proceedings/2013/SP/PharmaSUG-2013-SP04.pdf    ... View more