LISTSERV at the University of Georgia
Menubar Imagemap
Home Browse Manage Request Manuals Register
Previous messageNext messagePrevious in topicNext in topicPrevious by same authorNext by same authorPrevious page (July 2008, week 5)Back to main SAS-L pageJoin or leave SAS-L (or change settings)ReplyPost a new messageSearchProportional fontNon-proportional font
Date:   Thu, 31 Jul 2008 16:10:20 -0400
Reply-To:   Paul Dorfman <sashole@BELLSOUTH.NET>
Sender:   "SAS(r) Discussion" <SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
From:   Paul Dorfman <sashole@BELLSOUTH.NET>
Subject:   Re: Help with Array for Healthcare Claims Analysis
Comments:   To: Andy Sasuser <sas9bi@GMAIL.COM>

S9biu,

Correct. G_TOT is the total number of days in all allowable gaps. G_MAX is the maximal number of days permitted in a single gap. In your case, both are 2, because you allow for 1 gap with the maximum width of 2.

However, the ability to adjust both gives you more lattitude. For example, if you were allowed G_NUM=5 with G_MAX=4, you could have 2 1-day gaps, 1 3- day gap, and 2 4-day gaps, which would result in 2*1+1*3+2*4=13 total days in all gaps combined. Now 13 is permitted or not can be controlled by G_TOT. If it is set to =>13, the claim will pass, else it will be ditched.

More complex scenarios can be fairly easily accommodated by adding parameters and respective code, all the more than real-life continuous enrollment criteria (at least in my limmited experience) are somewhat more involved. For example, they may include specification of precisely how many gaps of certain withdths are allowed and other such intricacies.

Kind regards ------------ Paul Dorfman Jax, FL ------------

On Thu, 31 Jul 2008 12:44:33 -0500, sas 9 bi user <sas9bi@GMAIL.COM> wrote:

>Paul - >Wow this is great. Thanks so much for helping! > >So if I wanted to change my study to measure 1allowable gap for a total of >45 days are allowed and the length of time one would need to be eligible >after the claim is 365 days then I would change the macro vars to: > >%let g_max = 45 ; *max gap width ; >%let g_num = 1 ; *max num of gs ; >%let g_tot = 45 ; *max tot gap days ; >%let d_enr = 365 ; *max days cont enr aft clm ; > >Is that correct? What is the difference between %let g_max and %let g_tot? >Are they always the same? > >Thanks so much! > >On 7/30/08, Paul Dorfman <sashole@bellsouth.net> wrote: >> >> SAS BI User, >> >> Instead of "fixing" the clever Howard's array solution (he is a much better >> candidate), I am offering a much dummier code below. Note that I have >> changed the variables' names to suit my parsimonious nature. >> >> data clms ; >> input id clm_dt mmddyy11. ; >> format clm_dt yymmdd10. ; >> cards ; >> 111 01/27/2008 >> 112 01/27/2008 >> 123 01/05/2008 >> 456 01/03/2008 >> 789 01/06/2008 >> 789 01/31/2008 >> 888 01/04/2008 >> 999 01/20/2008 >> run ; >> >> data elig ; >> input id eff_dt mmddyy11. trm_dt mmddyy11. ; >> format eff_dt trm_dt yymmdd10. ; >> cards ; >> 111 01/01/2008 01/31/2008 >> 111 02/03/2008 12/31/2008 >> 112 01/01/2008 01/31/2008 >> 112 02/02/2008 02/08/2008 >> 112 02/10/2008 12/31/2008 >> 123 01/01/2008 01/31/2008 >> 123 04/01/2008 12/31/2099 >> 456 01/01/2008 02/29/2008 >> 456 03/01/2008 03/31/2008 >> 789 01/01/2008 01/31/2008 >> 789 02/01/2008 02/29/2008 >> 888 03/01/2007 01/31/2008 >> 888 03/01/2008 12/31/2008 >> 999 01/01/2008 01/31/2008 >> run ; >> >> proc sql ; >> create view clm_elig as >> select * from (select *, monotonic() as seq from clms) c, elig e >> where c.id = e.id >> order seq, c.id, e.eff_dt >> ; >> quit ; >> >> %let g_max = 2 ; *max gap width ; >> %let g_num = 1 ; *max num of gs ; >> %let g_tot = 2 ; *max tot gap days ; >> %let d_enr = 30 ; *max days cont enr aft clm ; >> >> data new (drop = _:) ; >> do until (last.id) ; >> set clm_elig ; >> by seq id ; >> _eff_dt = eff_dt max clm_dt min (clm_dt + &d_enr) ; >> _trm_dt = trm_dt max clm_dt min (clm_dt + &d_enr) ; >> if first.id then first_adj_eff_dt = _eff_dt ; >> else _g = sum (_eff_dt, -_trm_dt_p, -1) ; >> g_tot = sum (g_tot, _g, 0) ; >> g_num = sum (g_num, _g > 0) ; >> g_max = max (g_max, _g, 0) ; >> _trm_dt_p = _trm_dt ; >> end ; >> d_enr = sum (_trm_dt, -first_adj_eff_dt, -g_tot, 1) ; >> last_adj_trm_dt = _trm_dt ; >> if d_enr => &d_enr ; >> if g_max <= &g_max ; >> if g_num <= &g_num ; >> if g_tot <= &g_tot ; >> run ; >> >> You can control execution with the macro parameters above the step. The key >> to understanding the scheme is the lines where _eff_dt and _trm_dt are >> formed: both dates earlier than clm_dt are made equal to clm_dt, and both >> dates later than clm_dt are also made equal to clm_dt. >> >> Kind regards >> ------------ >> Paul Dorfman >> Jax, FL >> ------------ >> >> On Wed, 30 Jul 2008 09:53:51 -0500, sas 9 bi user <sas9bi@GMAIL.COM> >> wrote: >> >> >All - A while ago Howard assisted me re the below solution. I am trying >> to >> >add a new business rule to an array that he created and am not getting >> >anywhere. I work in healthcare analytics. I want to do a study where a >> >member needs to be eligible for 30 days or less after the claim. So below >> I >> >have a claim file and a eligibility file. A while ago I provided the >> claims >> >and eligibility datasets and Howard kindly came up with the data set >> called >> >'new', as created int he array below. It is a wonderful array that >> >calculates if a member has continuous coverage for 30 days after a claim. >> >If the member has 30 days continuous coverage, then the member would be in >> >my study. >> > >> >However, I have one new requirement and I wonder how I would code this new >> >requirement? The new requirement is - the member can have a break in >> their >> >eligibility of 2 days max, but only once, and the member must be eligible >> 30 >> >days total (2 days allowed gap, though only once). So they should really >> >have 28 days real eligibility coverage and the +2 gap days. >> > >> >For eg, take a look at member number 111 below. This mbr has a claim on >> >1/27/08. The member has eligibility 1/1/08 thru 1/31/08, then new >> coverage >> >2/3/08 through 12/31/08. So this member has a gap of 2 days and was also >> >eligible for 30 days (given that a gap of 2 days is allowed). >> > >> >I can't figure out how to alter the nice array below to allow for a gap of >> 2 >> >days max and find members who are eligible for 30 days? I want this >> member >> >111 to be in my study since the member's gap is 2 days or less and only >> >once. I cant figure out how to account for their gap of 2 days. Now >> member >> >112, this member has 2 gaps, and I dont want this member to be in the >> final >> >dataset because they do have 30 days of coverage if you count the gap of 2 >> >days or less, but this member's had 2 days of gap coverage but they >> occurred >> >on two different points in time and I can only allow one gap - else the >> >member is no in the study. >> > >> >Any thoughts? I graciously thank anyone for assistance. >> > >> >data claims; >> >input >> >mbrid date_of_claim mmddyy11.; >> >format date_of_claim date9.; >> >datalines >> >; >> >111 01/27/2008 >> >112 01/27/2008 >> >123 01/05/2008 >> >456 01/03/2008 >> >789 01/06/2008 >> >789 01/31/2008 >> >888 01/04/2008 >> >999 01/20/2008 >> >; >> >run; >> >data eligibility; >> >input mbrid effective mmddyy11. term mmddyy11.; >> >format effective term date9.; >> >datalines >> >; >> >111 01/01/2008 01/31/2008 >> >111 02/03/2008 12/31/2008 >> >112 01/01/2008 01/31/2008 >> >112 02/02/2008 02/08/2008 >> >112 02/10/2008 12/31/2008 >> >123 01/01/2008 01/31/2008 >> >123 04/01/2008 12/31/2099 >> >456 01/01/2008 02/29/2008 >> >456 03/01/2008 03/31/2008 >> >789 01/01/2008 01/31/2008 >> >789 02/01/2008 02/29/2008 >> >888 03/01/2007 01/31/2008 >> >888 03/01/2008 12/31/2008 >> >999 01/01/2008 01/31/2008 >> >; >> >run; >> > >> >data new(keep = mbrid date_of_claim); >> > array ee(60000); >> > do until (last.mbrid); >> > set eligibility(in=in_eligibility) >> > claims (in=in_claims); >> > by mbrid; >> > if in_eligibility then do day = effective to term; ee(day) = 1; end; >> > if in_claims then do; >> > do day = date_of_claim to date_of_claim + 30; >> > if missing( ee(day) ) then not30 = 1; >> > end; >> > if not30 then continue; >> > output; >> > end; >> > end; >> > run; >> > >> > >> > >> >/*end*/ >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >On 7/25/08, sas 9 bi user <sas9bi@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> /* >> >> Howard, a while ago you kindly helped me out re the below. To recap: >> >> >> >> I work in healthcare analytics. I want to do a study where a member >> needs >> >> to be eligible for 30 days or less after the claim. So below I have a >> claim >> >> file and a eligibility file. A while ago I provided the claims and >> >> eligibility datasets and you kindly came up with the data set called >> 'new', >> >> as created int he array below. It is a wonderful array that calculates >> if a >> >> member has continuous coverage for 30 days after a claim. If the member >> has >> >> 30 days continuous coverage, then the member would be in my study. And >> your >> >> array worked greatly. >> >> >> >> However, I have one new requirement and I wonder how I would code this >> new >> >> requirement? The new requirement is - the member can have a break in >> their >> >> eligibility of 2 days max, but only once, and the member must be >> eligible 30 >> >> days total (2 days allowed gap, though only once). So they should >> really >> >> have 28 days real eligibility coverage and the +2 gap days. >> >> >> >> For eg, take a look at member number 111 below. This mbr has a claim on >> >> 1/27/08. The member has eligibility 1/1/08 thru 1/31/08, then new >> coverage >> >> 2/3/08 through 12/31/08. So this member has a gap of 2 days and was >> also >> >> eligible for 30 days (given that a gap of 2 days is allowed). >> >> >> >> I can't figure out how to alter your nice array to allow for a gap of 2 >> >> days max and find members who are eligible for 30 days? I want this >> member >> >> 111 to be in my study since the member's gap is 2 days or less and only >> >> once. I cant figure out how to account for their gap of 2 days. Now >> member >> >> 112, this member has 2 gaps, and I dont want this member to be in the >> final >> >> dataset because they do have 30 days of coverage if you count the gap of >> 2 >> >> days or less, but this member's had 2 days of gap coverage but they >> occurred >> >> on two different points in time and I can only allow one gap - else the >> >> member is no in the study. >> >> >> >> Any thoughts? I graciously thank you for looking at this! >> >> >> >> */ >> >> >> >> data claims; >> >> input >> >> mbrid date_of_claim mmddyy11.; >> >> format date_of_claim date9.; >> >> datalines >> >> ; >> >> 111 01/27/2008 >> >> 112 01/27/2008 >> >> 123 01/05/2008 >> >> 456 01/03/2008 >> >> 789 01/06/2008 >> >> 789 01/31/2008 >> >> 888 01/04/2008 >> >> 999 01/20/2008 >> >> ; >> >> run; >> >> data eligibility; >> >> input mbrid effective mmddyy11. term mmddyy11.; >> >> format effective term date9.; >> >> datalines >> >> ; >> >> 111 01/01/2008 01/31/2008 >> >> 111 02/03/2008 12/31/2008 >> >> 112 01/01/2008 01/31/2008 >> >> 112 02/02/2008 02/08/2008 >> >> 112 02/10/2008 12/31/2008 >> >> 123 01/01/2008 01/31/2008 >> >> 123 04/01/2008 12/31/2099 >> >> 456 01/01/2008 02/29/2008 >> >> 456 03/01/2008 03/31/2008 >> >> 789 01/01/2008 01/31/2008 >> >> 789 02/01/2008 02/29/2008 >> >> 888 03/01/2007 01/31/2008 >> >> 888 03/01/2008 12/31/2008 >> >> 999 01/01/2008 01/31/2008 >> >> ; >> >> run; >> >> >> >> data new(keep = mbrid date_of_claim); >> >> array ee(60000); >> >> do until (last.mbrid); >> >> set eligibility(in=in_eligibility) >> >> claims (in=in_claims); >> >> by mbrid; >> >> if in_eligibility then do day = effective to term; ee(day) = 1; >> end; >> >> if in_claims then do; >> >> do day = date_of_claim to date_of_claim + 30; >> >> if missing( ee(day) ) then not30 = 1; >> >> end; >> >> if not30 then continue; >> >> output; >> >> end; >> >> end; >> >> run; >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> /*end*/ >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On 4/15/08, Howard Schreier <hs AT dc-sug DOT org> < >> >> schreier.junk.mail@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 15:01:34 -0500, sas 9 bi user <sas9bi@GMAIL.COM> >> >>> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> >Mary - Wow thanks so much for this. I have enjoyed seeing your >> >>> revisions. >> >>> >Being a SAS newbie, being able to see how you took something complex >> and >> >>> >then kept revising it till the current solution was nice. I learned >> more >> >>> by >> >>> >seeing your re-work. Thanks! >> >>> >> >>> However, Cherish is correct in pointing out that the real problem is to >> >>> consolidate the eligibility data so that that there is one observation >> for >> >>> each uninterrupted interval of coverage. The data set (call it >> >>> "eligibility_consolidated") looks like this: >> >>> >> >>> 111 01/01/2008 12/31/2099 >> >>> 123 01/01/2008 01/31/2008 >> >>> 123 04/01/2008 12/31/2099 >> >>> 456 01/01/2008 03/31/2008 >> >>> 789 01/01/2008 02/29/2008 >> >>> 888 03/01/2007 01/31/2008 >> >>> 888 03/01/2008 12/31/2008 >> >>> 999 01/01/2008 01/31/2008 >> >>> >> >>> See >> >>> >> >>> >> >> http://www.sascommunity.org/wiki/Processing_Data_with_Beginning_and_Ending_ Dates >> >>> >> >>> Then the solution is: >> >>> >> >>> create table new as select * >> >>> from claims as outer >> >>> where exists ( select 1 >> >>> from eligibility_consolidated >> >>> where mbrid = outer.mbrid >> >>> and effective LE discharge >> >>> and term GE discharge+30); >> >>> >> >>> There is also a DATA step solution which requires no pre-processing: >> >>> >> >>> data new(keep = mbrid discharge); >> >>> array ee(60000); >> >>> do until (last.mbrid); >> >>> set eligibility(in=ine) >> >>> claims (in=inc); >> >>> by mbrid; >> >>> if ine then do day = effective to term; ee(day) = 1; end; >> >>> if inc then do; >> >>> do day = discharge to discharge + 30; >> >>> if missing( ee(day) ) then not30 = 1; >> >>> end; >> >>> if not30 then continue; >> >>> output; >> >>> end; >> >>> end; >> >>> run; >> >>> >> >>> The array covers dates from 1960 into the 22nd century. For each ID, >> flags >> >>> are set for each day of eligibility. Then, for each discharge date, the >> >>> flags are checked. >> >>> >> >>> > >> >>> >On 4/14/08, Mary <mlhoward@avalon.net> wrote: >> >>> >> >> >>> >> And here, (drum-roll please, I'm feeling a bit of Hubris in >> this!!!) >> >>> is >> >>> >> the one pass solution >> >>> >> >> >>> >> -Mary >> >>> >> >> >>> >> * >> >>> >> >> >>> >> data >> >>> >> *claims; >> >>> >> >> >>> >> input >> >>> >> mbrid discharge mmddyy11.; >> >>> >> >> >>> >> format >> >>> >> discharge date9.; >> >>> >> >> >>> >> datalines >> >>> >> ; >> >>> >> >> >>> >> 111 01/27/2008 >> >>> >> >> >>> >> 123 01/05/2008 >> >>> >> >> >>> >> 456 01/03/2008 >> >>> >> >> >>> >> 789 01/06/2008 >> >>> >> >> >>> >> 789 01/31/2008 >> >>> >> >> >>> >> 888 01/04/2008 >> >>> >> >> >>> >> 999 01/20/2008 >> >>> >> >> >>> >> ; >> >>> >> * >> >>> >> >> >>> >> run >> >>> >> *;* >> >>> >> >> >>> >> data >> >>> >> *eligibility; >> >>> >> >> >>> >> input >> >>> >> mbrid effective mmddyy11. term mmddyy11.; >> >>> >> >> >>> >> format >> >>> >> effective term date9.; >> >>> >> >> >>> >> datalines >> >>> >> ; >> >>> >> >> >>> >> 111 01/01/2008 01/31/2008 >> >>> >> >> >>> >> 111 02/01/2008 02/29/2008 >> >>> >> >> >>> >> 111 03/01/2008 12/31/2008 >> >>> >> >> >>> >> 111 01/01/2008 12/31/2099 >> >>> >> >> >>> >> 123 01/01/2008 01/31/2008 >> >>> >> >> >>> >> 123 04/01/2008 12/31/2099 >> >>> >> >> >>> >> 456 01/01/2008 02/29/2008 >> >>> >> >> >>> >> 456 03/01/2008 03/31/2008 >> >>> >> >> >>> >> 789 01/01/2008 01/31/2008 >> >>> >> >> >>> >> 789 02/01/2008 02/29/2008 >> >>> >> >> >>> >> 888 03/01/2007 01/31/2008 >> >>> >> >> >>> >> 888 03/01/2008 12/31/2008 >> >>> >> >> >>> >> 999 01/01/2008 01/31/2008 >> >>> >> >> >>> >> ; >> >>> >> * >> >>> >> >> >>> >> run >> >>> >> *; >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> * >> >>> >> >> >>> >> proc >> >>> >> **sql*; >> >>> >> >> >>> >> create >> >>> >> table new as >> >>> >> >> >>> >> select >> >>> >> mbrid, discharge >> >>> >> >> >>> >> from >> >>> >> claims a >> >>> >> >> >>> >> where >> >>> >> >> >>> >> mbrid >> >>> >> in (select mbrid from eligibility b where(b.effective <= a.discharge >> + >> >>> *30 >> >>> >> *) and (b.term >= a.discharge + *30*)) and >> >>> >> >> >>> >> mbrid >> >>> >> in (select mbrid from eligibility b where(b.effective <= a.discharge >> + >> >>> *29 >> >>> >> *) and (b.term >= a.discharge + *29*)) and >> >>> >> >> >>> >> mbrid >> >>> >> in (select mbrid from eligibility b where(b.effective <= a.discharge >> + >> >>> *28 >> >>> >> *) and (b.term >= a.discharge + *28*)) and >> >>> >> >> >>> >> mbrid >> >>> >> in (select mbrid from eligibility b where(b.effective <= a.discharge >> + >> >>> *27 >> >>> >> *) and (b.term >= a.discharge + *27*)) and >> >>> >> >> >>> >> mbrid >> >>> >> in (select mbrid from eligibility b where(b.effective <= a.discharge >> + >> >>> *26 >> >>> >> *) and (b.term >= a.discharge + *26*)) and >> >>> >> >> >>> >> mbrid >> >>> >> in (select mbrid from eligibility b where(b.effective <= a.discharge >> + >> >>> *25 >> >>> >> *) and (b.term >= a.discharge + *25*)) and >> >>> >> >> >>> >> mbrid >> >>> >> in (select mbrid from eligibility b where(b.effective <= a.discharge >> + >> >>> *24 >> >>> >> *) and (b.term >= a.discharge + *24*)) and >> >>> >> >> >>> >> mbrid >> >>> >> in (select mbrid from eligibility b where(b.effective <= a.discharge >> + >> >>> *23 >> >>> >> *) and (b.term >= a.discharge + *23*)) and >> >>> >> >> >>> >> mbrid >> >>> >> in (select mbrid from eligibility b where(b.effective <= a.discharge >> + >> >>> *22 >> >>> >> *) and (b.term >= a.discharge + *22*)) and >> >>> >> >> >>> >> mbrid >> >>> >> in (select mbrid from eligibility b where(b.effective <= a.discharge >> + >> >>> *21 >> >>> >> *) and (b.term >= a.discharge + *21*)) and >> >>> >> >> >>> >> mbrid >> >>> >> in (select mbrid from eligibility b where(b.effective <= a.discharge >> + >> >>> *20 >> >>> >> *) and (b.term >= a.discharge + *20*)) and >> >>> >> >> >>> >> mbrid >> >>> >> in (select mbrid from eligibility b where(b.effective <= a.discharge >> + >> >>> *19 >> >>> >> *) and (b.term >= a.discharge + *19*)) and >> >>> >> >> >>> >> mbrid >> >>> >> in (select mbrid from eligibility b where(b.effective <= a.discharge >> + >> >>> *18 >> >>> >> *) and (b.term >= a.discharge + *18*)) and >> >>> >> >> >>> >> mbrid >> >>> >> in (select mbrid from eligibility b where(b.effective <= a.discharge >> + >> >>> *17 >> >>> >> *) and (b.term >= a.discharge + *17*)) and >> >>> >> >> >>> >> mbrid >> >>> >> in (select mbrid from eligibility b where(b.effective <= a.discharge >> + >> >>> *16 >> >>> >> *) and (b.term >= a.discharge + *16*)) and >> >>> >> >> >>> >> mbrid >> >>> >> in (select mbrid from eligibility b where(b.effective <= a.discharge >> + >> >>> *15 >> >>> >> *) and (b.term >= a.discharge + *15*)) and >> >>> >> >> >>> >> mbrid >> >>> >> in (select mbrid from eligibility b where(b.effective <= a.discharge >> + >> >>> *14 >> >>> >> *) and (b.term >= a.discharge + *14*)) and >> >>> >> >> >>> >> mbrid >> >>> >> in (select mbrid from eligibility b where(b.effective <= a.discharge >> + >> >>> *13 >> >>> >> *) and (b.term >= a.discharge + *13*)) and >> >>> >> >> >>> >> mbrid >> >>> >> in (select mbrid from eligibility b where(b.effective <= a.discharge >> + >> >>> *12 >> >>> >> *) and (b.term >= a.discharge + *12*)) and >> >>> >> >> >>> >> mbrid >> >>> >> in (select mbrid from eligibility b where(b.effective <= a.discharge >> + >> >>> *11 >> >>> >> *) and (b.term >= a.discharge + *11*)) and >> >>> >> >> >>> >> mbrid >> >>> >> in (select mbrid from eligibility b where(b.effective <= a.discharge >> + >> >>> *10 >> >>> >> *) and (b.term >= a.discharge + *10*)) and >> >>> >> >> >>> >> mbrid >> >>> >> in (select mbrid from eligibility b where(b.effective <= a.discharge >> + >> >>> *09 >> >>> >> *) and (b.term >= a.discharge + *09*)) and >> >>> >> >> >>> >> mbrid >> >>> >> in (select mbrid from eligibility b where(b.effective <= a.discharge >> + >> >>> *08 >> >>> >> *) and (b.term >= a.discharge + *08*)) and >> >>> >> >> >>> >> mbrid >> >>> >> in (select mbrid from eligibility b where(b.effective <= a.discharge >> + >> >>> *07 >> >>> >> *) and (b.term >= a.discharge + *07*)) and >> >>> >> >> >>> >> mbrid >> >>> >> in (select mbrid from eligibility b where(b.effective <= a.discharge >> + >> >>> *06 >> >>> >> *) and (b.term >= a.discharge + *06*)) and >> >>> >> >> >>> >> mbrid >> >>> >> in (select mbrid from eligibility b where(b.effective <= a.discharge >> + >> >>> *05 >> >>> >> *) and (b.term >= a.discharge + *05*)) and >> >>> >> >> >>> >> mbrid >> >>> >> in (select mbrid from eligibility b where(b.effective <= a.discharge >> + >> >>> *04 >> >>> >> *) and (b.term >= a.discharge + *04*)) and >> >>> >> >> >>> >> mbrid >> >>> >> in (select mbrid from eligibility b where(b.effective <= a.discharge >> + >> >>> *03 >> >>> >> *) and (b.term >= a.discharge + *03*)) and >> >>> >> >> >>> >> mbrid >> >>> >> in (select mbrid from eligibility b where(b.effective <= a.discharge >> + >> >>> *02 >> >>> >> *) and (b.term >= a.discharge + *02*)) and >> >>> >> >> >>> >> mbrid >> >>> >> in (select mbrid from eligibility b where(b.effective <= a.discharge >> + >> >>> *01 >> >>> >> *) and (b.term >= a.discharge + *01*)) and >> >>> >> >> >>> >> mbrid >> >>> >> in (select mbrid from eligibility b where(b.effective <= a.discharge >> + >> >>> *00 >> >>> >> *) and (b.term >= a.discharge + *00*));* >> >>> >> >> >>> >> quit >> >>> >> *;* >> >>> >> >> >>> >> run >> >>> >> *; >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> >>> >> *From:* sas 9 bi user <sas9bi@GMAIL.COM> >> >>> >> *To:* SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU >> >>> >> *Sent:* Monday, April 14, 2008 12:09 PM >> >>> >> *Subject:* Re: Proc SQL and maybe a correlated subquery >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> Mary you are so kind to have worked thru this. I like your logic >> and >> >>> it >> >>> >> does the trick. >> >>> >> >> >>> >> Thanks so much! >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >>


Back to: Top of message | Previous page | Main SAS-L page