Hi Elisa, 

If you suspect that the imputation model itself varies across the units, it seems reasonable to use different imputation models for those units. So (a) appears fine. As for (b), Zelig is probably the most straightforward way to analyze regression models based imputations. See section 4.9 of our documentation for more:

http://r.iq.harvard.edu/docs/amelia/amelia.pdf

Hope that helps!

Cheers,
matt.

~~~~~~~~~~~
Matthew Blackwell
Assistant Professor of Political Science
University of Rochester
url: http://www.mattblackwell.org


On Sun, Dec 30, 2012 at 6:41 AM, Elisa D'Arcangelo <darcangelo.elisa@googlemail.com> wrote:
Good morning,

I am using amelia II on mass spec data, in order to deal with missing values. I have two questions:

1) my experimental setup is as follows: the intensities of the same proteins were measured in ctrl, condition 1, condition2, condition3, condition4. This model implies that certain proteins might not be present at all in a certain condition, while being present in several other conditions. hence, I don not want amelia to impute these values. In other words, I want amelia to only impute WITHIN conditions. At least this is the way I though of this problem and I sub-devided the data frame into 5, according to conditions, and fed amelia each condition separately.

Is this approach OK?

2) I perform m=10 imputations, and fit each imputed data set to a linear model, hence I get 10 slightly different outputs. In R, what is the best way to pool the results of m data sets?

Thank you very much for your help, I appreciate it.

Have a good New Years!!

Regards,

Elisa

--
Amelia mailing list served by HUIT
[Un]Subscribe/View Archive: http://lists.gking.harvard.edu/?info=amelia
More info about Amelia: http://gking.harvard.edu/amelia
Amelia mailing list
Amelia@lists.gking.harvard.edu

To unsubscribe from this list or get other information:

https://lists.gking.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/amelia