September 2007 - EpiData-list - University of Manitoba Mailing Lists

Epidata Analysis b122 available for testing
by epidata-list＠lists.umanitoba.ca 02 Oct '07

02 Oct '07

These weeks several problems and clarifications have been made on the "road" to release finally EpiData Analysis as v2.0 Some aspects are still insufficiently final, but the level of changes are going into "corner" details from my point of view. As of build 122 some aspects have been fixed: e.g. - EpiDemiological tables (odds ratios, rr and attributable risk) will use highest value of case and exposure variables as default. - A new table dialog has been a success in my personal teaching. Quite clearly beginners adapt much faster when having proper (intuitive) dialogs. - Sorting of frequency tables by numbers - More graph types can now be used with a "group variable", e.g.: box age /by=sex - Many more subtle details have been fixed. Many of these are invisible to the end-user, but clarification makes the whole programme more stable. This will also allow shorter development time for future new commands and additions. Some issues are still creating problems, such as: - internal errors after kruskal-wallis tests. - parts of relate system not working for some files - creating more intuitive dialogs for remaining parts of the system - removing reported bugs (see mantis system). Some users might find it odd that new problems arise, but this is due to the rewriting of core parts. And consequential changes in other parts of the software take some time to find, if they are not pinpointed by the error tracking system. This system is a collection of pgm files doing all verifying results and function in all parts of the programme. Usually when a new error is reported it is due to not being tested for in the error tracking system. The system is now based on 41 pgm files with around 1150 different conditions being tested and verified. Version 2 will not be released before all of the consequences of the rewriting of core parts has taken place. But as could be stated on the www.epidata.dk/testing.php page : "Many of the functions are running and functioning very well, so after each user has verified the function of what he/she uses there is no problem in using the test versions." E.g. the table module has no known errors just now. Kind regards Jens Lauritsen EpiData Association

1 2

A bug of epidata
by epidata-list＠lists.umanitoba.ca 11 Sep '07

11 Sep '07

To any concern, I think that I have found a bug of epidata when I want to export the data from epidata to sas. The content of .qes file: This is a example! The {first} text field: __________ The {second} text field: ________________________________________________________________________________ The {third} text field: ____________ The content of .sas file which is generated by epidata. * EpiData created two files by exporting * D:\statistics\temp\epidata bug\bug.rec * * 1. D:\statistics\temp\epidata bug\bug.sas * is the SAS command file * 2. D:\statistics\temp\epidata bug\bug.txt * is an ASCII text file containing the raw data. * * You may modify the command file before submitting them. ; DATA bug(LABEL="a bug of epidata"); INFILE "D:\statistics\temp\epidata bug\bug.txt"; INPUT FIRST $ 1-10 / SECOND $ 1-80 THIRD $ 1-12; LABEL first="The first text field:" second="The second text field:" third="The third text field:"; run; The conten of .txt file which is also generated by epidata: a b c d e f When I run the .sas file in sas, the log window showed that: NOTE: The infile "D:\statistics\temp\epidata bug\bug.txt" is: File Name=D:\statistics\temp\epidata bug\bug.txt, RECFM=V,LRECL=256 NOTE: LOST CARD. FIRST=f SECOND= THIRD= _ERROR_=1 _N_=4 NOTE: 9 records were read from the infile "D:\statistics\temp\epidata bug\bug.txt". The minimum record length was 10. The maximum record length was 80. NOTE: SAS went to a new line when INPUT statement reached past the end of a line. NOTE: The data set WORK.BUG has 3 observations and 3 variables. NOTE: DATA statement used (Total process time): real time 0.18 seconds cpu time 0.07 seconds I can get the dataset 'bug' in work library. But it is not what I want. Now I can resolve the problem. I need modify the .sas file. The file which is modifed is listed below: * EpiData created two files by exporting * D:\statistics\temp\epidata bug\bug.rec * * 1. D:\statistics\temp\epidata bug\bug.sas * is the SAS command file * 2. D:\statistics\temp\epidata bug\bug.txt * is an ASCII text file containing the raw data. * * You may modify the command file before submitting them. ; DATA bug(LABEL="a bug of epidata"); INFILE "D:\statistics\temp\epidata bug\bug.txt"; INPUT FIRST $ 1-10 / SECOND $ 1-80 / THIRD $ 1-12; LABEL first="The first text field:" second="The second text field:" third="The third text field:"; run; The 'second' field caused the trouble. The 'second' field's width is 80. I hope someone can fix it. All the files is attached. You can have a try.

1 0

Re- LIST Command
by epidata-list＠lists.umanitoba.ca 03 Sep '07

03 Sep '07

Dear Jens, Thanks for the quick response. I will share my bit on the wiki. Regarding the BROWSE and LIST command message, I was not able to get the output of list command. My programmer found out the solution. We could solve the LIST command problem by SET ECHO=ON. When SET ECHO=OFF, the LIST command is also turned off. If it was supposed to be like that, please include this in the documentation. With regards, Dr. Shavinder Singh

1 0

Issues on EpiData Analysis - list etc.
by epidata-list＠lists.umanitoba.ca 03 Sep '07

03 Sep '07

Shavinder Sing suggested that ..... If each of us writes the documentation of ONE command with example, our command reference can be really exhaustive and useful like EPI6 manual. .... is very appropriate. The idea of a user based documentation centre is exactly the idea of the wiki principles, where everyone can add whatever is possible for them. I expect that a common base wiki will be ready within 6-12 months. Just now the following can be of immense importance: a. Anyone having good examples for distribution consider adding these to the experimental wiki now placed at www.epidata.org/wiki b. Consider writing documents in the form of "how to ...." and make a collection available from a local site, which can then be linked from the main site. c. Make sure that everyone registers for news from EpIData Association, since the number of persons registering there is the only "proof" of usage we have when arguing with authorities that the effort is truly a non-profit international effort. Every so often some discussions come up here in which until now it has been very important to be able to show the large number of registered users. Regarding the "LIST and BROWSE commands are not exactly replaceable." - this is true. I do not understand however why the function of list is not sufficient. There is a deficiency in list not being able to show "value labels", but apart from that I do not see any deficiencies - except that the output window is slow with large amounts of output. Possibly I do not understand the "...kindly preserve the functionality of LIST command as it was in EPI6. " For inspiration of a collaborative effort I suggest everyone to look at the website course developed as part of a number of courses run under the "wings" of IUATLD Union (see www.iuatld.org) by Hans L. Rieder, presented at "http://www.tbrieder.org/epidata/course.htm". The contents have been developed by the "EpiData Promotors" (http://www.tbrieder.org/epidata/epidata_promoters.htm) with some substantive solutions from me. The courses have also influenced the contents of commands and other parts of the Epidata Software. regards Jens Lauritsen EpiData Association

1 0

Thank and LIST command
by epidata-list＠lists.umanitoba.ca 02 Sep '07

02 Sep '07

Dear Jens, Release of build 118 is good news. Thanks you for this wonderful software. In the last few weeks, I had posted 3 queries on the list; a. Command Set replace logfile=on b. Incomplete execution of PGM c. Relational Files Relate error. Problem a could be solved by the erase command. You solved the problem b by suggesting the use of IMIF command along with If then. You solved problem c in the build 118. Jamie had also helped to clarifying the issue. My gratitude to you and Jamie. May I suggest the following? 1. There is a large Epidata Entry and Analysis user base now in many countries. Most of us are past users of EPI6 and have graduated to Epidata thankfully. If each of us writes the documentation of ONE command with example, our command reference can be really exhaustive and useful like EPI6 manual. Of course this will be massive editing job for Epidata team. There are many queries still concerned with the commands. If we were not contributing financially, at least this much effort would save some resources for the Epidata Team. If this idea appeals to you, I am willing to do my bit. 2. LIST and BROWSE commands are not exactly replaceable. BROWSE command is meant for visualizing the data only, while LIST command can actually print the list of records with selected variables in the output file. Build 118 releases LIST command only lists the list of single variables after query. If possible, kindly preserve the functionality of LIST command as it was in EPI6. With regards, Dr. Shavinder Singh

1 0