The DOI matches its Crossref record; 27 of the 27 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Handling missing data in clinical research
Open accessAbstract
Because missing data are present in almost every study, it is important to handle missing data properly. First of all, the missing data mechanism should be considered. Missing data can be either completely at random (MCAR), at random (MAR), or not at random (MNAR). When missing data are MCAR, a complete case analysis can be valid. Also when missing data are MAR, in some situations a complete case analysis leads to valid results. However, in most situations, missing data imputation should be used. Regarding imputation methods, it is highly advised to use multiple imputations because multiple imputations lead to valid estimates including the uncertainty about the imputed values. When missing data are MNAR, also multiple imputations do not lead to valid results. A complication hereby is that it not possible to distinguish whether missing data are MAR or MNAR. Finally, it should be realized that preventing to have missing data is always better than the treatment of missing data.
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.
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?
In the citing paper
“When planning to handle anticipated missing data, protocol authors have a choice between various methods, including imputing data, fitting a mixed effects model to repeated measures data, or omitting participants.428 429”
From SPIRIT 2025 explanation and elaboration: updated guideline for protocols of randomised trials (2025) · cites this paper as [429]
In the citing paper
“The mechanism resulting in missing data affects the risk of bias and decisions on how best to handle the missing data.428 429”
From SPIRIT 2025 explanation and elaboration: updated guideline for protocols of randomised trials (2025) · cites this paper as [429]
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
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
RUBIN, D. B. (1976) · Biometrika · doi:10.1093/biomet/63.3.581 · Cited by 9,925
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
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
(2010) · Cited by 7,034
(2010) · University of Twente Research Information · Cited by 6,037
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
Multiple Imputation for Nonresponse in Surveys.
Lynn, P. J., & Rubin, D. B. (1988) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series D (The Statistician) · doi:10.2307/2348774 · Cited by 2,330
The prevention and treatment of missing data in clinical trials
Little, R. J., D'Agostino, R., Cohen, M. L., Dickersin, K., Emerson, S. S., Farrar, J. T., Frangakis, C., Hogan, J. W., Molenberghs, G., Murphy, S. A., et al. (2012) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmsr1203730 · Cited by 1,884
Missing Data in Clinical Research: A Tutorial on Multiple Imputation
Austin, P. C., White, I. R., Lee, D. S., & van Buuren, S. (2021) · Canadian Journal of Cardiology · doi:10.1016/j.cjca.2020.11.010 · Cited by 1,006 · cited 1×
“CCA has a lot of drawbacks and should be avoided in general [8].”
BackgroundUsing the outcome for imputation of missing predictor values was preferred
Moons, K. G. M., Donders, R. A. R. T., Stijnen, T., & Harrell, F. E. (2006) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.01.009 · Cited by 999
Marshall, A., Altman, D. G., HOLDER, R. L., & Royston, P. J. (2009) · BMC Medical Research Methodology · doi:10.1186/1471-2288-9-57 · Cited by 883
Lee, K. J., & Carlin, J. (2010) · American Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/aje/kwp425 · Cited by 787
Flexible Imputation of Missing Data
Demirtaş, H. (2018) · Journal of Statistical Software · doi:10.18637/jss.v085.b04 · Cited by 721
Twisk, J., de Boer, M., de Vente, W., & Heymans, M. (2013) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2013.03.017 · Cited by 568 · cited 1×
“Furthermore, in longitudinal data analyses, when outcome data are missing in some of the repeated measures, an analysis on the available data will also provide valid results [10].”
BackgroundSelf-citationLee, K. J., Tilling, K. M., Cornish, R., Little, R. J. A., Bell, M. L., Goetghebeur, E. J. T., Hogan, J. W., & Carpenter, J. R. (2021) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2021.01.008 · Cited by 408
Dealing With Missing Outcome Data in Randomized Trials and Observational Studies
Groenwold, R. H. H., Donders, A. R. T., Roes, K. C. B., Harrell, F. E., & Moons, K. G. M. (2012) · American Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/aje/kwr302 · Cited by 398
Eekhout, I., de Vet, H. C. W., Twisk, J. W. R., Brand, J. P. L., de Boer, M. R., & Heymans, M. W. (2014) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2013.09.009 · Cited by 302
Self-citationEekhout, I. E., de Boer, M. R., Twisk, J. W. R., de Vet, H. C. W., & Heymans, M. W. (2012) · Epidemiology · doi:10.1097/ede.0b013e3182576cdb · Cited by 235
Self-citationMultiple imputation by chained equations for systematically and sporadically missing multilevel data
Resche‐Rigon, M., & White, I. R. (2016) · Statistical Methods in Medical Research · doi:10.1177/0962280216666564 · Cited by 218
Jolani, S., Debray, T. P. A., Koffijberg, H., van Buuren, S., & Moons, K. G. M. (2015) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.6451 · Cited by 192
Combining multiple imputation and bootstrap in the analysis of cost‐effectiveness trial data
Brand, J., van Buuren, S., le Cessie, S., & van den Hout, W. (2019) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.7956 · Cited by 131
Wahl, S., Boulesteix, A., Zierer, A., Thorand, B., & van de Wiel, M. A. (2016) · BMC Medical Research Methodology · doi:10.1186/s12874-016-0239-7 · Cited by 115
Héraud-Bousquet, V., Larsen, C., Carpenter, J. R., Desenclos, J., & Strat, Y. L. (2012) · BMC Medical Research Methodology · doi:10.1186/1471-2288-12-73 · Cited by 64
Eekhout, I. E., de Vet, H. C. W., de Boer, M. R., Twisk, J. W. R., & Heymans, M. W. (2016) · Statistical Methods in Medical Research · doi:10.1177/0962280216654511 · Cited by 41
Self-citationA multiple imputation‐based sensitivity analysis approach for data subject to missing not at random
Hsu, C., He, Y., Hu, C., & Zhou, W. (2020) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.8691 · Cited by 25
Austin, P., Lee, D. S., Ko, D. T., & White, I. (2019) · Circulation. Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes · doi:10.1161/circoutcomes.119.005927 · Cited by 23
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Koo, M., & Yang, S.-W. (2025) · Encyclopedia · doi:10.3390/encyclopedia5010018 · Cited by 504
SPIRIT 2025 explanation and elaboration: updated guideline for protocols of randomised trials
Hróbjartsson, A., Boutron, I., Hopewell, S., Moher, D., Schulz, K. F., Collins, G. S., Tunn, R., Aggarwal, R., Berkwits, M., Berlin, J. A., et al. (2025) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj-2024-081660 · Cited by 171
Li, J., Guo, S., Ma, R., He, J., Zhang, X., Rui, D., Ding, Y., Li, Y., Jian, L.-Y., Cheng, J., et al. (2024) · BMC Medical Research Methodology · doi:10.1186/s12874-024-02173-x · Cited by 177
Intention to treat and per protocol analyses: differences and similarities
Calafell, J. M., Burón, A., Castells, X., & Porta, M. S. (2024) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2024.111457 · Cited by 95
Data Management in Biobanking: Strategies, Challenges, and Future Directions
Alkhatib, R., & Gaede, K. I. (2024) · BioTech · doi:10.3390/biotech13030034 · Cited by 77
Metadata
- Authors
- Heymans, M. W., & Twisk, J. W. R.
- Affiliations
- Amsterdam University Medical Centers (NL)
- Corresponding author
- Twisk, Jos W.R.
- Venue
- Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2022-11
- Volume
- 151
- Pages
- 185-188
- ISSN
- 0895-4356 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4296631245
- Cited by
- 399
- References
- 27
- Citations by year
- 2026: 153 · 2025: 129 · 2024: 90 · 2023: 27
- FWCI
- 45.37
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Journal of Clinical Epidemiology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Amsterdam UMC (VU Amsterdam) - Institutional Repository (publishedVersion, other-oa)
- Pure Amsterdam UMC (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Epidemiology
- Keywords
- missing data, missing data mechanisms, complete case analysis, multiple imputation, missing at random, missing not at random, clinical research, imputation uncertainty
- MeSH terms
- Humans, Uncertainty
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
