Multiple imputation methods for handling incomplete longitudinal and clustered data where the target analysis is a linear mixed effects model
Open accessAbstract
Multiple imputation (MI) is increasingly popular for handling multivariate missing data. Two general approaches are available in standard computer packages: MI based on the posterior distribution of incomplete variables under a multivariate (joint) model, and fully conditional specification (FCS), which imputes missing values using univariate conditional distributions for each incomplete variable given all the others, cycling iteratively through the univariate imputation models. In the context of longitudinal or clustered data, it is not clear whether these approaches result in consistent estimates of regression coefficient and variance component parameters when the analysis model of interest is a linear mixed effects model (LMM) that includes both random intercepts and slopes with either covariates or both covariates and outcome contain missing information. In the current paper, we compared the performance of seven different MI methods for handling missing values in longitudinal and clustered data in the context of fitting LMMs with both random intercepts and slopes. We study the theoretical compatibility between specific imputation models fitted under each of these approaches and the LMM, and also conduct simulation studies in both the longitudinal and clustered data settings. Simulations were motivated by analyses of the association between body mass index (BMI) and quality of life (QoL) in the Longitudinal Study of Australian Children (LSAC). Our findings showed that the relative performance of MI methods vary according to whether the incomplete covariate has fixed or random effects and whether there is missingnesss in the outcome variable. We showed that compatible imputation and analysis models resulted in consistent estimation of both regression parameters and variance components via simulation. We illustrate our findings with the analysis of LSAC data.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Multiple imputations will be used for missing data where appropriate, such as drop-out or missing item or questionnaire.
“We will use multiple imputations for missing data where appropriate (i.e. drop-out, missing item/questionnaire) [84].”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 33 · Cited by 61
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Leacy FP Multiple imputation under missing not at random assumptions via fully conditional specification [dissertation]. PhD thesis 2016
- Authors
- Huque, M. H., Moreno‐Betancur, M., Quartagno, M., Simpson, J. A., Carlin, J. B., & Lee, K. J.
- Affiliations
- The University of Melbourne (AU)
- University College London (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Huque, Md Hamidul
- ORCID
- Venue
- Biometrical Journal
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2020-01-09
- Volume
- 62
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 444-466
- ISSN
- 0323-3847 (ISSN-L)
- 1521-4036
- PMC
- PMC7614826
- OpenAlex
- W3000300768
- Cited by
- 61
- References
- 33
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 29 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 2
- FWCI
- 8.11
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Biometrical Journal (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Minerva Access (University of Melbourne) (submittedVersion)
- UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- National Health and Medical Research Council (1102468)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Markov Chains and Monte Carlo Methods
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Advanced Causal Inference Techniques
- Keywords
- multiple imputation, missing data, longitudinal data, clustered data, linear mixed models, fully conditional specification, joint modeling, variance components, body mass index, quality of life, Longitudinal Study of Australian Children
- MeSH terms
- Biometry, Longitudinal Studies, Cluster Analysis, Linear Models
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review