The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A multiple imputation strategy for clinical trials with truncation of patient data
Open accessAbstract
Clinical trials of drug treatments for psychiatric disorders commonly employ the parallel groups, placebo‐controlled, repeated measure randomized comparison. When patients stop adhering to their originally assigned treatment, investigators often abandon data collection. Thus, non‐adherence produces a monotone pattern of unit‐level missing data, disabling the analysis by intent‐to‐treat. We propose an approach based on multiple imputation of the missing responses, using the approximate Bayesian bootstrap to draw ignorable repeated imputations from the postrior predictive distribution of the missing data, stratifying by a balancing score for the observed responses prior to withdrawal. We apply the method and some variations to data from a large randomized trial of treatments for panic disorder, and compare the results to those obtained by the original analysis that used the standard (endpoint) method.
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
Estimating causal effects of treatments in randomized and nonrandomized studies
Rubin, D. B. (1974) · Journal of Educational Psychology · doi:10.1037/h0037350 · Cited by 9,436
Explanatory and pragmatic attitudes in therapeutical trials
Schwartz, D., & Lellouch, J. (1967) · Journal of Chronic Diseases · doi:10.1016/0021-9681(67)90041-0 · Cited by 1,185
Cited by
Missing data: our view of the state of the art
Schafer, J. L., & Graham, J. W. (2002) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/1082-989x.7.2.147 · Cited by 11,638
Schafer, J. L. (1999) · Statistical Methods in Medical Research · doi:10.1177/096228029900800102 · Cited by 3,949
Unützer, J., Katon, W., Callahan, C. M., Williams, Jr., Hunkeler, E., Harpole, L., Hoffing, M., Della Penna, R. D., Noël, P. H., Lin, E. H. B., et al. (2002) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.288.22.2836 · Cited by 2,405
A comparison of inclusive and restrictive strategies in modern missing data procedures.
Collins, L. M., Schafer, J. L., & Kam, C.-M. (2001) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/1082-989x.6.4.330 · Cited by 2,389
Horton, N. J., & Kleinman, K. P. (2007) · The American Statistician · doi:10.1198/000313007x172556 · Cited by 786
Metadata
- Authors
- Lavori, P. W., Dawson, R., & Shera, D.
- Venue
- Statistics in Medicine
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1995-09-15
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 17
- Pages
- 1913-1925
- ISSN
- 0277-6715 (ISSN-L)
- 1097-0258
- OpenAlex
- W2048654012
- Cited by
- 291
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 0.87
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
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.