The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Multiple Imputation for Missing Data via Sequential Regression Trees
Abstract
Multiple imputation is particularly well suited to deal with missing data in large epidemiologic studies, because typically these studies support a wide range of analyses by many data users. Some of these analyses may involve complex modeling, including interactions and nonlinear relations. Identifying such relations and encoding them in imputation models, for example, in the conditional regressions for multiple imputation via chained equations, can be daunting tasks with large numbers of categorical and continuous variables. The authors present a nonparametric approach for implementing multiple imputation via chained equations by using sequential regression trees as the conditional models. This has the potential to capture complex relations with minimal tuning by the data imputer. Using simulations, the authors demonstrate that the method can result in more plausible imputations, and hence more reliable inferences, in complex settings than the naive application of standard sequential regression imputation techniques. They apply the approach to impute missing values in data on adverse birth outcomes with more than 100 clinical and survey variables. They evaluate the imputations using posterior predictive checks with several epidemiologic analyses of interest.
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
The Elements of Statistical Learning
Hastie, T., Tibshirani, R., & Friedman, J. (2009) · Springer Series in Statistics · doi:10.1007/978-0-387-84858-7 · Cited by 25,970
Multiple Imputation for Nonresponse in Surveys
Rubin, D. B. (1987) · Wiley Series in Probability and Statistics · doi:10.1002/9780470316696 · Cited by 20,701
Multiple imputation after 18+ years
Rubin, D. B. (1996) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1080/01621459.1996.10476908 · Cited by 4,072
Schafer, J. L. (1999) · Statistical Methods in Medical Research · doi:10.1177/096228029900800102 · Cited by 3,949
How Many Imputations are Really Needed? Some Practical Clarifications of Multiple Imputation Theory
Graham, J. W., Olchowski, A. E., & Gilreath, T. D. (2007) · Prevention Science · doi:10.1007/s11121-007-0070-9 · Cited by 2,795 · cited 1×
“We generate m 1⁄4 10 imputed sets for each method, although in some situations using m1⁄4 20 or 40 may be warranted for added accuracy (25).”
Measuring the Functional Components of Social Support
Cohen, S., Mermelstein, R., Kamarck, T., & Hoberman, H. M. (1985) · Social Support: Theory, Research and Applications · doi:10.1007/978-94-009-5115-0_5 · Cited by 2,296 · cited 1×
“The variables include mothers’ demographics, such as age, race, education, and income; mothers’ medical history variables, such as the existence of chronic hypertension, anemia, and previous birth outcomes; mothers’ environmental variables, such as levels of cadmium, nicotine, cotinine, mercury, and lead in the mother…”
Cited by
Missing value imputation: a review and analysis of the literature (2006–2017)
Lin, W.-C., & Tsai, C.-F. (2020) · Artificial Intelligence Review · doi:10.1007/s10462-019-09709-4 · Cited by 612
Pouwels, K. B., Hopkins, S., Llewelyn, M. J., Walker, A. S., McNulty, C. A., & Robotham, J. V. (2019) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.l440 · Cited by 126
Metadata
- Authors
- Burgette, L. F., & Reiter, J. P.
- Venue
- American Journal of Epidemiology
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2010-09-14
- Volume
- 172
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 1070-1076
- ISSN
- 0002-9262 (ISSN-L)
- 1476-6256
- OpenAlex
- W2169076391
- Cited by
- 363
- References
- 6
- FWCI
- 6.19
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Multiple Imputation for Missing Data via Sequential Regression Trees. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/aje/kwq260
- The paper
- Burgette, L. F., & Reiter, J. P. (2010). Multiple Imputation for Missing Data via Sequential Regression Trees. American Journal of Epidemiology. https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwq260
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.