CODEWITHSUNDEEP
rplyrr-factor
jnam27
jnam27

Reputation: 1437

Does plyr skip missing levels of a factor [that is the grouping variable]?

Does plyr skip missing levels of a factor [that is the grouping variable]? It's the first of my questions in diagnosing a problem.

I have a dataset where patients are in strata=rural or strata=city. I want to compare the age in treatment=A to treatment=B.

For example, I am trying to do:

ddply(data.c, .(strata), function(x) t.test(age~treatment, data=x, na.rm=TRUE)

But it tells me

Error in t.test.formula(age ~ treatment, data = x, na.rm = TRUE) : grouping factor must have exactly 2 levels

If I run factor(data$strata) and factor(data$treatment) I see only two levels, respectively (they are two labels, respectively; that's not a problem, right?).

Does plyr think that NA is a level in the grouping factor? What might be the problem for the error message?

I've been Googling and looking on stackoverflow to answer the question. I'm pretty new to R but I could not find an answer. Any help is much appreciated.

So I have some example code. Chase's example worked nicely but when I use my data, I still get the same error.

dlply(data.c, .(strata), function(x) t.test(age~treatment, data=x, na.rm=TRUE produced the same error.

I don't understand why this is.

Below is my data.c

        strata  age treatment
1   1   57.8630136986301    p_3
2   0   52.958904109589 p_3
3   NA  97.2438356164384    p12
4   0   88.2027397260274    p12
5   1   77.5890410958904    p12
6   1   43.9123287671233    p12
7   1   63.5260273972603    p_3
8   1   42.1890410958904    p12
9   0   52.1753424657534    p12
10  1   65.6493150684932    p12
11  0   44.9835616438356    p12
12  1   64.8849315068493    p12
13  1   57.5835616438356    p12
14  0   47.3013698630137    p12
15  0   74.0356164383562    NA
16  0   65.4986301369863    p12
17  1   83.986301369863 p12
18  0   47.4904109589041    p12
19  1   47.8630136986301    p12
20  1   58.8520547945205    p12
21  1   61.3342465753425    p12
22  1   66.841095890411 p12
23  1   55.6383561643836    p12
24  1   52.7178082191781    p12
25  1   71.4630136986301    p12
26  1   NA  p12
27  1   59.2082191780822    p12
28  1   69.8575342465753    p12
29  1   46.7397260273973    p12
30  1   53.5013698630137    p_3
31  1   41.3205479452055    p12
32  0   51.3917808219178    p_3
33  1   47.8684931506849    p12
34  1   87.654794520548 p12
35  0   75.558904109589 p12
36  1   71.2520547945205    p12
37  1   44.9808219178082    p_3
38  1   52  p_3
39  1   54.7643835616438    p_3
40  1   85.6630136986301    p_3
41  1   74.1835616438356    p_3
42  1   56.8684931506849    p_3
43  1   87.572602739726 p_3
44  1   85.0109589041096    p_3
45  1   70.0767123287671    p_3
46  0   47.2328767123288    p12
47  1   63.7972602739726    p12
48  1   85.8054794520548    p12
49  1   67.027397260274 p12
50  1   60.7342465753425    p12
51  0   61.9479452054794    p_3
52  0   86.8712328767123    p12
53  1   87.8219178082192    p12
54  1   49.9424657534247    p12
55  0   83.386301369863 p12
56  1   88.3013698630137    p12
57  1   55.7890410958904    p12
58  1   63.7616438356164    p12
59  1   55.5041095890411    p12
60  1   43.5232876712329    p12
61  1   58.8246575342466    p12
62  0   46.7397260273973    p12
63  0   74.2027397260274    p_3
64  0   51.9205479452055    p_3
65  0   78.1890410958904    p_3
66  0   78.9917808219178    p_3

Upvotes: 0

Views: 2158

Answers (2)

Brian Diggs
Brian Diggs

Reputation: 58875

plyr does treat missing as a separate group for the purposes of grouping variables. Therefore, in your example, there are three groups: 0, 1, and NA. You can see which of the groups is throwing an error by adding the .inform argument:

dlply(data.c, 
      .(strata), 
      function(x) t.test(age~treatment, data=x, na.rm=TRUE), 
      .inform=TRUE)

which reports:

Error in t.test.formula(age ~ treatment, data = x, na.rm = TRUE) : 
  grouping factor must have exactly 2 levels
Error: with piece 3: 
  strata      age treatment
3     NA 97.24384       p12

And in fact there is just one row with strata of NA, and doing a t.test on a single data point (or rather, where all the data points are in the same group) will give the error you see:

> t.test(age~treatment, data=data.c[is.na(data.c$strata),], na.rm=TRUE)
Error in t.test.formula(age ~ treatment, data = data.c[is.na(data.c$strata),  : 
  grouping factor must have exactly 2 levels

To get around this problem, you can either subset data.c in the dlply call:

dlply(data.c[!is.na(data.c$strata),],
      .(strata), 
      function(x) t.test(age~treatment, data=x, na.rm=TRUE))

(which assumes that you know where the problem will be to work around it) and which gives:

$`0`

        Welch Two Sample t-test

data:  age by treatment 
t = 0.2653, df = 15.729, p-value = 0.7942
alternative hypothesis: true difference in means is not equal to 0 
95 percent confidence interval:
 -13.41565  17.24792 
sample estimates:
mean in group p_3 mean in group p12 
         64.22896          62.31283 


$`1`

        Welch Two Sample t-test

data:  age by treatment 
t = 0.6606, df = 18.612, p-value = 0.517
alternative hypothesis: true difference in means is not equal to 0 
95 percent confidence interval:
 -6.998471 13.440397 
sample estimates:
mean in group p_3 mean in group p12 
         65.50091          62.27995 


attr(,"split_type")
[1] "data.frame"
attr(,"split_labels")
  strata
1      0
2      1

or you can protect the call with error catching. plyr provides a convenience wrapper try_default for such a purpose.

dlply(data.c, 
      .(strata), 
      function(x) try_default(t.test(age~treatment, data=x, na.rm=TRUE),
                              NULL))

which gives

Error in t.test.formula(age ~ treatment, data = x, na.rm = TRUE) : 
  grouping factor must have exactly 2 levels
$`0`

        Welch Two Sample t-test

data:  age by treatment 
t = 0.2653, df = 15.729, p-value = 0.7942
alternative hypothesis: true difference in means is not equal to 0 
95 percent confidence interval:
 -13.41565  17.24792 
sample estimates:
mean in group p_3 mean in group p12 
         64.22896          62.31283 


$`1`

        Welch Two Sample t-test

data:  age by treatment 
t = 0.6606, df = 18.612, p-value = 0.517
alternative hypothesis: true difference in means is not equal to 0 
95 percent confidence interval:
 -6.998471 13.440397 
sample estimates:
mean in group p_3 mean in group p12 
         65.50091          62.27995 


$`NA`
NULL

attr(,"split_type")
[1] "data.frame"
attr(,"split_labels")
  strata
1      0
2      1
3     NA

Note that there are 3 elements to this output including one for NA which is set to NULL due to the try_default.

Upvotes: 1

Chase
Chase

Reputation: 69251

I think you will need to provide us some sample data as I'm not able to duplicate your error. I do get an error about ddply() complaining that the following:

 Error in list_to_dataframe(res, attr(.data, "split_labels")) : 
  Results must be all atomic, or all data frames

This is because the output from t.test() is not a data.frame but a list of class htest. So simply telling plyr to return a list object instead fixes the problem. If you want to extract a specific value from the list, you can probably get a data.frame back.

Here's how I set up your data:

x <- data.frame(strata = sample(letters[1:2], 100, TRUE),
                age = sample(18:65, 100, TRUE),
                treatment = sample(LETTERS[1:2], 100, TRUE))
x[sample(nrow(x), 10, FALSE), "strata"] <- NA
x[sample(nrow(x), 10, FALSE), "treatment"] <- NA

Then simply calling function dlply() instead works:

out <- dlply(x, .(strata), function(x) t.test(age~treatment, data = x, na.rm=TRUE))

And to answer your question, yes - plyr seems to treat NA as a valid group, as evidenced by the length and names out the out list object:

> names(out)
[1] "a"  "b"  "NA"

As I said, a better description of you problem may result in a better answer - but hopefully this gets you on the right path.

Upvotes: 2

Related Questions