Cited by 2,582Statistical Methods and Bayesian InferenceStatistical Methods in EpidemiologyAdvanced Causal Inference Techniques

Review: a gentle introduction to imputation of missing values.

Open access
Donders, A. Rogier T., van der Heijden, Geert J.M.G., Stijnen, Theo, Moons, Karel G.M.·2006·Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

Abstract

In most situations, simple techniques for handling missing data (such as complete case analysis, overall mean imputation, and the missing-indicator method) produce biased results, whereas imputation techniques yield valid results without complicating the analysis once the imputations are carried out. Imputation techniques are based on the idea that any subject in a study sample can be replaced by a new randomly chosen subject from the same source population. Imputation of missing data on a variable is replacing that missing by a value that is drawn from an estimate of the distribution of this variable. In single imputation, only one estimate is used. In multiple imputation, various estimates are used, reflecting the uncertainty in the estimation of this distribution. Under the general conditions of so-called missing at random and missing completely at random, both single and multiple imputations result in unbiased estimates of study associations. But single imputation results in too small estimated standard errors, whereas multiple imputation results in correctly estimated standard errors and confidence intervals. In this article we explain why all this is the case, and use a simple simulation study to demonstrate our explanations. We also explain and illustrate why two frequently used methods to handle missing data, i.e., overall mean imputation and the missing-indicator method, almost always result in biased estimates.

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.jclinepi.2006.01.014

Cites

18 of 18 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

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Rubin DB. Inferences and missing data. Biometrika 1976;63:581e90.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Donders, A. R. T., van der Heijden, G. J. M. G., Stijnen, T., & Moons, K. G. M.
Affiliations
  • Utrecht University (NL)
  • Erasmus MC (NL)
  • University Medical Center Utrecht (NL)
Corresponding author
Donders, A. Rogier T.
Venue
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2006-10
Volume
59
Issue
10
Pages
1087-1091
ISSN
0895-4356 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2162772535
Cited by
2,582
References
18
Citations by year
2026: 101 · 2025: 177 · 2024: 183 · 2023: 168 · 2022: 187 · 2021: 197 · 2020: 139 · 2019: 168 · 2018: 134 · 2017: 123 · 2016: 144 · 2015: 148 · 2014: 153 · 2013: 165 · 2012: 113
FWCI
32.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Clinical Epidemiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (publishedVersion)
  • EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion)
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 › Advanced Causal Inference Techniques
Keywords
missing data, multiple imputation, single imputation, mean imputation, complete case analysis, missing at random, missing completely at random, bias, standard error estimation, simulation study
MeSH terms
Data Interpretation, Statistical, Humans, Research Design, Bias, Logistic 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