The Random effect builder in SAS Studio does a lot! The best advice is to look at how the code changes as you add effects in different ways. The subject effect crosses the subject effect with all other random effects on that RANDOM statement. It will appear as the SUBJECT= effect on the RANDOM statement. The group effect causes the RANDOM statement to fit the random covariance parameters on this statement separately for each level of the group effect. It will appear as the GROUP= effect on the RANDOM statement.  ... View more

The community would need more information on the problem you face and on the data you have, the model you want to run, and on what the output table you quote would have in it. ... View more

You can find a pretty good read on the convergence status table here . This in the shared concepts and topics section of the SAS/STAT documentation.  ... View more

Please contact technical support and provide your code (and data). The traceback helps. Seeing your code helps more. Also, provide the number of observations in the data set and the levels in your STRATA statement. ... View more

When you specify PLOTS=MATRIX, then PROC CORR does produce the matrix plot of correlations. That plot is done using ODS graphics.    Some procedures produce plots without the use of special options inside the procedure. PROC CORR does not produce that ODS graph without PLOTS=MATRIX on the PROC CORR statement.  ... View more

Yes, you can create a copy of the TIME variable to use as a place holder on the REPEATED statement. Call the copy of the TIME variable TIME_C or something that reminds you that you are using this effect only on the REPEATED statement to indicate the order of the time responses. TIME on the MODEL statement and/or RANDOM statement. TIME_C as the repeated effect before the slash on the REPEATED statement.  ... View more

The SOLUTION option on the RANDOM statement gives you the random deviation of each individual's slope from the overall slope. The overall slope comes from the coefficient for HEIGHT given in the S option for the MODEL statement. To get individual slopes, combine the results of the S option on the RANDOM statement and the S option on the MODEL statement.  ... View more

One problem with this model is that the RANDOM and REPEATED statements are fitting the same covariance structure in Z. The RANDOM statement does this through G and the REPEATED through R. You should get a message about the G matrix or Hessian being non-positive definite with this model. Most of the time, MIXED will set one of the variance components to 0 to make this more obvious for you. To "fix" this, try using AR(1) (or any structure other than CS) on the REPEATED statement.  Your LSMEANS statement is making comparisons among levels of your 3-way interaction at the average value of the covariate. You can try using the AT option to see if there are differences in the interaction at other, possibly more interesting, values of the covariate. ... View more

With three non-nested random effects, your model falls into a class of models (cross-classified models) that can be very time-intensive and memory-intensive to fit. Knowing a little more about the data structure and number of levels to your 3 random effects will help the community understand your problem better. If you have a large number of levels to any of these effects, sampling observations from those levels might help. You can run repeated samples to build up a distribution for your random effect variances.  ... View more

Try using just WEEK as the repeated effect (the term after the REPEATED statement) and see if that will converge. I am not sure what MIXED will do if you include SEGMENT as both part of the repeated effect and the subject effect. You can try specifying the R option to see how MIXED is correlating the errors in your data. ... View more

Posting the code used and actual output will help the community answer your question more quickly and more accurately. Comparison of likelihood stats from competing mixed models can by tricky. Changes in the model can make the comparisons can make those comparisons invalid. Seeing the code will help the community provide a better response. Thanks! ... View more

The RANDOM statement random patient(treatment); correlates all the observations from the same patient with a CS structure.  The RANDOM statement random week*patient(treatment); correlates all the observations from the same week for a patient. So that statement puts a CS structure on all the segments from the same week on the same patient.  From your description, you may not need to further correlate the errors in your model. You state that segment is of no interest to you, so you do not need an effect that includes segment. It does appear that you are measuring both eyes on a patient, with 56 observations coming from each eye. If both, do you need to correlate observations from the same eye? You could correlate the observations from the same segment across the weeks, using something like segment*eye*patient(treatment) as the subject effect on a REPEATED statement. That might look something like repeated week / subject=segment*eye*patient(treatment) type=??; where you can choose the covariance structure applied. This model will get expensive to estimate if you have lots of patients and many weeks, however.  ... View more

It is best just to avoid PROC ANOVA. It was meant as a procedure for textbook-type problems. The method behind PROC ANOVA requires balanced data and there is no way to work around that requirement. Use GLM for your modeling needs that use only fixed effects. For models with random effects and/or repeated measures, use PROC MIXED.  ... View more

Balanced/Unbalanced data refers to the counts in each cell of your design (same number of observations per treatment group). PROC ANOVA requires balanced data in the design, PROC GLM and PROC MIXED do not. The data situation you describe is slightly different. Subjects with incomplete repeated measures are not included in PROC GLM. The method of moments used in GLM requires complete data for each subject. Subjects with incomplete data are used in PROC MIXED. Maximum likelihood methods do not require that subjects have observations for all time points. MIXED does allow only one observation per time point for a subject. So, GLM and MIXED will not agree if you have incomplete data on your subjects in a repeated measures analysis.  ... View more