Cited by 1,006Statistical Methods and Bayesian InferenceStatistical Methods in EpidemiologyStatistical Methods in Clinical Trials

Missing Data in Clinical Research: A Tutorial on Multiple Imputation

Open access
Austin, Peter C., White, Ian R., Lee, Douglas S., van Buuren, Stef·2021·Canadian Journal of Cardiology

Abstract

Missing data is a common occurrence in clinical research. Missing data occurs when the value of the variables of interest are not measured or recorded for all subjects in the sample. Common approaches to addressing the presence of missing data include complete-case analyses, where subjects with missing data are excluded, and mean-value imputation, where missing values are replaced with the mean value of that variable in those subjects for whom it is not missing. However, in many settings, these approaches can lead to biased estimates of statistics (eg, of regression coefficients) and/or confidence intervals that are artificially narrow. Multiple imputation (MI) is a popular approach for addressing the presence of missing data. With MI, multiple plausible values of a given variable are imputed or filled in for each subject who has missing data for that variable. This results in the creation of multiple completed data sets. Identical statistical analyses are conducted in each of these complete data sets and the results are pooled across complete data sets. We provide an introduction to MI and discuss issues in its implementation, including developing the imputation model, how many imputed data sets to create, and addressing derived variables. We illustrate the application of MI through an analysis of data on patients hospitalised with heart failure. We focus on developing a model to estimate the probability of 1-year mortality in the presence of missing data. Statistical software code for conducting MI in R, SAS, and Stata are provided.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.cjca.2020.11.010

Cites

35 of 35 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 36 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Austin, P. C., White, I. R., Lee, D. S., & van Buuren, S.
Affiliations
  • University of Toronto (CA)
  • MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL (GB)
  • University Health Network (CA)
Corresponding author
Austin, Peter C.
Venue
Canadian Journal of Cardiology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2021-09
Volume
37
Issue
9
Pages
1322-1331
ISSN
0828-282X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3109682927
Cited by
1,006
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 191 · 2025: 306 · 2024: 264 · 2023: 150 · 2022: 82 · 2021: 13
FWCI
10.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Canadian Journal of Cardiology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • TNO Repository (submittedVersion)
  • Utrecht University Repository (Utrecht University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences
  • Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CRT43823, CTP79847)
  • Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care
  • Medical Research Council (MC_UU_12023/21)
  • Chest Heart and Stroke Scotland
  • Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Epidemiology
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
Keywords
multiple imputation, missing data, clinical research, complete case analysis, mean imputation, imputation models, derived variables, heart failure, one-year mortality
MeSH terms
Clinical Trials as Topic, Data Interpretation, Statistical, Humans, Research Design

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