First, my thanks to Dirk for answering an earlier query of mine. Please
forgive another question.
For each record, I calculate a value at the bottom of the data entry form
and determine if the respondent fits in group 1 or group 2. Is there any
way to hide this group designation for the individual record (as in the
value cannot be seen in the form), but still count the aggregate number of
respondents fitting into group 1 or group 2?
I consider using a temporary variable as a counter, but this raises
complications if records are entered in separate batches or earlier records
have their values modified.
Thanks!
Anthony
> [EpiData-list] verification question
>>> [1] I would like to MATCH RECORDS by more than ONE FIELD when
>>> preparing double entry verification - is this possible ?
>>> [2] Once a file is verified, does the corrected data reside in the
>>> *.REC or the *_dbl.REC file ?
EpiData has two principles of validation:
A. Compare two separate files entered independently.
B. Compare at field level while entering data.
Preparation of the two are both at the tool menu.
A. Copy structure (of existing rec + chk file)
B. Prepare Double Entry Verification
Actual validation:
A. Is done after all data have been entered. In the document menu you
can "Validate Duplicate Files". When you specify the two files up to
three fields can be used to match the two files.
B. Is done while entering data the second time. You can only match on
one field. The corrected data resides in the ..._dbl.rec file, which is
the one you are adding data to.
After point B you can run the two files with option A and get a record
of how much was corrected while entering data the second time in
..._dbl.rec file.
If you want to create a unique match while entering data on more than
one field a typical way of doing so would be to create a key field like
this:
To do so, e.g. your matching fields are v1 v2 v3 in the check file:
v1
mustenter
end
v2
mustenter
end
v3
mustenter
after entry
keyfield = string(v1)+" "+string(v2)+" "+string(v3)
end
keyfield
noenter
key unique
end
I am not sure how double entry would handle this, but make a test and
see how it works.
regards
Jens Lauritsen
EpiData Association
>>[1] I would like to MATCH RECORDS by more than ONE FIELD when preparing
>>double entry verification - is this possible ? And if so, how do I do it ?
>>
>>[2] Once a file is verified, does the corrected data reside in the *.REC
>>or the *_dbl.REC file ?
>>
>>Thank you.
I will be back at my desk on Monday 5 September 2005 . Until then my
access to email will be very limited, and I will address most of it upon
my return.
If there is anything requiring urgent attention, please contact:
Rebecca.Collins(a)lshtm.ac.uk +44 020 7927 22 14 or
Rachel.Clarke(a)lshtm.ac.uk +44 020 7927 22 14
Kind regards
Kristof
>>> epidata-list 08/25/05 18:01 >>>
Send EpiData-list mailing list submissions to
epidata-list(a)lists.umanitoba.ca
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.umanitoba.ca/mailman/listinfo/epidata-list
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
epidata-list-request(a)lists.umanitoba.ca
You can reach the person managing the list at
epidata-list-owner(a)lists.umanitoba.ca
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of EpiData-list digest..."
Analysis build 36 was just released for testing.
at http://www.epidata.dk/testing.php
Unless users report severe problems, the current build will be released
as version 1.0 with some restrictions or removal of commands with
problems, see below.
Version 0.9 release 5 build 36
* Added or modified
o A "select font" on first startup to guide the user for efficient
setup of screen
o Improved documentation of output formation
o Table command can show categories defined as missing
o New option controls if more than one instance of the programme
can run
o Aspects of handling missing value further implemented.
o Parsing of strings changed to exclude trailing blanks: e.g "Lion "
is the same as "Lion", but not the same as " Lion".
o sorting of tables corrected
o Tests of homegenity (interaction) in summary stratified 2x2 tables
removed until final stable solution is found
* Bugs fixed:
o "Pointer error" in tables, graphs or describe fixed
o Error in table estimates for 2x2 tables
o Recnumber now returns number within current select
o set listrec was not working
Remaining known major issues to settle before v1.0
* Tables must be included in txt formatted log files
Known major issues not settled or clarified
* Relating files not tested fully
* Appending in combination with records marked for deletion
* Odds Ratios and RR in tables with Rare data (0 in cells)
* Tests of homegenity (interaction) in summary stratified 2x2
tables removed until final stable solution is found
Known issues not fixed (put on future list)
* Correlate command results in "floating point error" when correlate
cannot be calculated
* Contents of strings should be converted to UPPER in logical
statements to work. e.g. count if upper(v) = "TEST"
* Setting format (set number format) is not consistent
Kind regards
Jens Lauritsen
[1] I would like to MATCH RECORDS by more than ONE FIELD when preparing
double entry verification - is this possible ? And if so, how do I do it ?
[2] Once a file is verified, does the corrected data reside in the *.REC
or the *_dbl.REC file ?
Thank you.
You cannot protect the chk-file completely (e.g. against someone
determined to change its contents), but you can protect it from
accidental changes it by setting the read-only flag of the file (see
"file attributes" of your operating system).
Dirk
Anthony (epidata-list-request(a)lists.umanitoba.ca) wrote:
> I have some coefficient values and equations in my chk file and I wondered
> if there was some way to protect them from being changed by another user
> down the road?
>
> In other words, can I structure it so somone in the field can enter the data
> into the form but not manipulate, accidentally or otherwise, the chk file
> contents?
I have some coefficient values and equations in my chk file and I wondered
if there was some way to protect them from being changed by another user
down the road?
In other words, can I structure it so somone in the field can enter the data
into the form but not manipulate, accidentally or otherwise, the chk file
contents?
Any help would be much appreciated. Thank you!
Anthony
Question sent to info(a)epidata.dk:
I wrote commands as following, which I follow the help commands:
dob
AFTER ENTRY
LET age=round(int(("1997/11/01"-dob)/365.25))
END
END
But when I change "1997/11/01" into today, as in the following commands, it works! Why so?
dob
AFTER ENTRY
LET age=round(int((today-dob)/365.25))
END
END
So I just want to ask what is the problem, because I strictly followed your commands in help manual, but age cannot be calculated on a given date.
The formulations above are correct, with one exception. THe help file says also:
EpiData was made in Europe and here dates are written in the notation dd/mm/yyyy, so to make the statements above work LET age=round(int(("1997/11/01"-dob)/365.25))
should be: LET age=round(int(("01/11/1997"-dob)/365.25)) regardless of which format dob has.
It is better to send questions like this to the EpiData list at: epidata-list(a)lists.umanitoba.ca,
since the info @ epidata.dk is very often overly filled with spam mails.
Jens Lauritsen
Coodinator and initiator of EpiData
To see value labels you need not (only) the question file (.qes) but the
records validation file, as well. One possibility for the different
results you obtain is that the validation file (.chk) is not always in
the directory EpiData expects it to be - EpiData lets you enter data,
create a codebook etc. even if no validation file exists (or if the
validation file is in a different directory as the records file .rec).
In that case, however, no value labels can be applied.
Dirk
Cahterine Mathews (epidata-list-request(a)lists.umanitoba.ca) wrote:
> Hi
> We're using version 3.1, downloaded from the Epi Data site. This is the
> first time we've used Epi Data. We are in the process of entering data
> into it. Initally, when we created a codebook from the QES file, the
> codebook displayed the values together with the value labels. But in
> subsequent attempts to create a codebook from the same QES file, we have
> found that the codebook won't show the value labels we entered into the
> QES file. Sometimes it won't even show the values. Do you have any
> ideas about this?
*************************************************
Dr. Dirk Enzmann
Institute of Criminal Sciences
Dept. of Criminology
Edmund-Siemers-Allee 1
D-20146 Hamburg
Germany
phone: +49-040-42838.7498 (office)
+49-040-42838.4591 (Billon)
fax: +49-040-42838.2344
email: dirk.enzmann(a)jura.uni-hamburg.de
www:
http://www2.jura.uni-hamburg.de/instkrim/kriminologie/Mitarbeiter/Enzmann/E…
*************************************************