The DOI matches its Crossref record; 9 of the 9 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Bias and efficiency of multiple imputation compared with complete‐case analysis for missing covariate values
Abstract
When missing data occur in one or more covariates in a regression model, multiple imputation (MI) is widely advocated as an improvement over complete‐case analysis (CC). We use theoretical arguments and simulation studies to compare these methods with MI implemented under a missing at random assumption. When data are missing completely at random, both methods have negligible bias, and MI is more efficient than CC across a wide range of scenarios. For other missing data mechanisms, bias arises in one or both methods. In our simulation setting, CC is biased towards the null when data are missing at random. However, when missingness is independent of the outcome given the covariates, CC has negligible bias and MI is biased away from the null. With more general missing data mechanisms, bias tends to be smaller for MI than for CC. Since MI is not always better than CC for missing covariate problems, the choice of method should take into account what is known about the missing data mechanism in a particular substantive application. Importantly, the choice of method should not be based on comparison of standard errors. We propose new ways to understand empirical differences between MI and CC, which may provide insights into the appropriateness of the assumptions underlying each method, and we propose a new index for assessing the likely gain in precision from MI: the fraction of incomplete cases among the observed values of a covariate (FICO). Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Overview
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
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Multiple Imputation for Nonresponse in Surveys
Rubin, D. B. (1987) · Wiley Series in Probability and Statistics · doi:10.1002/9780470316696 · Cited by 20,701
McCullagh, P., & Nelder, J. A. (1989) · doi:10.1007/978-1-4899-3242-6 · Cited by 16,836
Statistical Analysis with Missing Data
Little, R. J. A., & Rubin, D. B. (2002) · Wiley Series in Probability and Statistics · doi:10.1002/9781119013563 · Cited by 8,473
Sterne, J. A. C., White, I. R., Carlin, J. B., Spratt, M., Royston, P., Kenward, M. G., Wood, A. M., & Carpenter, J. R. (2009) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.b2393 · Cited by 7,299
Self-citationAnalysis of Incomplete Multivariate Data
Schafer, J. L. (1997) · doi:10.1201/9781439821862 · Cited by 6,012
Multiple imputation after 18+ years
Rubin, D. B. (1996) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1080/01621459.1996.10476908 · Cited by 4,072
Schafer, J. L. (1999) · Statistical Methods in Medical Research · doi:10.1177/096228029900800102 · Cited by 3,949
Multiple Imputation of Missing Values
Royston, P. (2004) · The Stata Journal: Promoting communications on statistics and Stata · doi:10.1177/1536867x0400400301 · Cited by 2,340
4. Regression with Missing Ys: An Improved Strategy for Analyzing Multiply Imputed Data
von Hippel, P. T. (2007) · Sociological Methodology · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9531.2007.00180.x · Cited by 1,495
Cited by
Multiple imputation using chained equations: Issues and guidance for practice
White, I. R., Royston, P., & Wood, A. M. (2011) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.4067 · Cited by 9,792
Self-citationBhaskaran, K., Douglas, I., Forbes, H., dos-Santos-Silva, I., Leon, D. A., & Smeeth, L. (2014) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(14)60892-8 · Cited by 1,707
Bhaskaran, K., dos-Santos-Silva, I., Leon, D. A., Douglas, I. J., & Smeeth, L. (2018) · The Lancet Diabetes & Endocrinology · doi:10.1016/s2213-8587(18)30288-2 · Cited by 1,228
Accounting for missing data in statistical analyses: multiple imputation is not always the answer
Hughes, R. A., Heron, J., Sterne, J. A. C., & Tilling, K. (2019) · International Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/ije/dyz032 · Cited by 802
Groenwold, R. H. H., White, I. R., Donders, A. R. T., Carpenter, J. R., Altman, D. G., & Moons, K. G. M. (2012) · Canadian Medical Association Journal · doi:10.1503/cmaj.110977 · Cited by 538
Self-citationOutcome-sensitive multiple imputation: a simulation study
Kontopantelis, E., White, I. R., Sperrin, M., & Buchan, I. (2017) · BMC Medical Research Methodology · doi:10.1186/s12874-016-0281-5 · Cited by 205
Self-citationFarmer, R. E., Mathur, R., Schmidt, A. F., Bhaskaran, K., Fatemifar, G., Eastwood, S. V., Finan, C., Denaxas, S., Smeeth, L., & Chaturvedi, N. (2019) · Journal of the American Heart Association · doi:10.1161/jaha.118.011638 · Cited by 144
Kern, C., Wan, J., LeWinn, K. Z., Ramirez, F. D., Lee, Y., McCulloch, C. E., Langan, S. M., & Abuabara, K. (2021) · JAMA Dermatology · doi:10.1001/jamadermatol.2021.2657 · Cited by 103
Sullivan, T. R., Salter, A. B., Ryan, P., & Lee, K. J. (2015) · American Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/aje/kwv100 · Cited by 86
Muzambi, R., Bhaskaran, K., Smeeth, L., Brayne, C., Chaturvedi, N., & Warren-Gash, C. (2021) · The Lancet Healthy Longevity · doi:10.1016/s2666-7568(21)00118-5 · Cited by 84
Persistent organic pollutants and pregnancy complications
Smarr, M. M., Grantz, K. L., Zhang, C., Sundaram, R., Maisog, J. M., Barr, D. B., & Louis, G. M. B. (2016) · Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.02.030 · Cited by 80
Carreira, H., Williams, R., Funston, G., Stanway, S., & Bhaskaran, K. (2021) · PLOS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1003504 · Cited by 78
“former smoker) and drinking status (never drinker, current drinker, and former drinker), were estimated for all outcomes in complete cases analyses; multiple imputation was not used, as the missingness was considered likely to be missing not at random in a primary care setting [22,23], and complete case analysis minim…”
MethodIron status predicts malaria risk in Malawian preschool children
Jonker, F. A. M., Calis, J. C. J., van Hensbroek, M. B., Phiri, K., Geskus, R. B., Brabin, B. J., & Leenstra, T. (2012) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0042670 · Cited by 77
Sugiura‐Ogasawara, M., Ebara, T., Yamada, Y., Shoji, N., Matsuki, T., Kano, H., Kurihara, T., Omori, T., Tomizawa, M., Miyata, M., et al. (2019) · American Journal of Reproductive Immunology · doi:10.1111/aji.13072 · Cited by 51
Single, A., Bilevicius, E., Johnson, E. A., & Keough, M. T. (2019) · Mindfulness · doi:10.1007/s12671-019-1092-7 · Cited by 16
Bottigliengo, D., Lorenzoni, G., Ocagli, H., Martinato, M., Berchialla, P., & Gregori, D. (2021) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph18136694 · Cited by 13
Oskarsson, V., Sadr-Azodi, O., Discacciati, A., Orsini, N., & Wolk, A. (2018) · European Journal of Nutrition · doi:10.1007/s00394-017-1526-8 · Cited by 4
Metadata
- Authors
- White, I. R., & Carlin, J. B.
- Venue
- Statistics in Medicine
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2010-09-13
- Volume
- 29
- Issue
- 28
- Pages
- 2920-2931
- ISSN
- 0277-6715 (ISSN-L)
- 1097-0258
- OpenAlex
- W2015568638
- Cited by
- 744
- References
- 9
- FWCI
- 15.35
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
