Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,101

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Missing-Data Adjustments in Large Surveys

Little, Roderick J. A.·1988·Journal of Business & Economic Statistics

Abstract

Useful properties of a general-purpose imputation method for numerical data are suggested and discussed in the context of several large government surveys. Imputation based on predictive mean matching is proposed as a useful extension of methods in existing practice, and versions of the method are presented for unit nonresponse and item nonresponse with a general pattern of missingness. Extensions of the method to provide multiple imputations are also considered. Pros and cons of weighting adjustments are discussed, and weighting-based analogs to predictive mean matching are outlined.

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.

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/07350015.1988.10509663

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

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

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

Show all 2 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Little, R. J. A.
Venue
Journal of Business & Economic Statistics
Published
1988-07
Volume
6
Issue
3
Pages
287-296
ISSN
  • 0735-0015 (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-2707
OpenAlex
W1972851018
Cited by
1,101
References
2
FWCI
2.19
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.