Multiple imputation methods for longitudinal blood pressure measurements from the Framingham Heart Study
- PMID: 14975111
- PMCID: PMC1866479
- DOI: 10.1186/1471-2156-4-S1-S43
Multiple imputation methods for longitudinal blood pressure measurements from the Framingham Heart Study
Abstract
Missing data are a great concern in longitudinal studies, because few subjects will have complete data and missingness could be an indicator of an adverse outcome. Analyses that exclude potentially informative observations due to missing data can be inefficient or biased. To assess the extent of these problems in the context of genetic analyses, we compared case-wise deletion to two multiple imputation methods available in the popular SAS package, the propensity score and regression methods. For both the real and simulated data sets, the propensity score and regression methods produced results similar to case-wise deletion. However, for the simulated data, the estimates of heritability for case-wise deletion and the two multiple imputation methods were much lower than for the complete data. This suggests that if missingness patterns are correlated within families, then imputation methods that do not allow this correlation can yield biased results.
References
-
- Little RJA, Rubin DB. Statistical Analysis with Missing Data. New York, John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 2002.
-
- Little RJA. Regression with missing X's: a review. J Am Stat Assoc. 1992;87:1227–1237. doi: 10.2307/2290664. - DOI
-
- Rubin DB. Multiple Imputation for Nonresponse in Surveys. New York, John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 1987.
-
- Laird NM. Missing data in longitudinal studies. Stat Med. 1988;7:305–315. - PubMed
-
- Allison PD. Missing Data. Sage University Papers Series on Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences, 07-136. Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage. 2001.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
