Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2008 Aug 4:6:57.
doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-6-57.

Simple imputation methods were inadequate for missing not at random (MNAR) quality of life data

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Simple imputation methods were inadequate for missing not at random (MNAR) quality of life data

Shona Fielding et al. Health Qual Life Outcomes. .

Abstract

Objective: QoL data were routinely collected in a randomised controlled trial (RCT), which employed a reminder system, retrieving about 50% of data originally missing. The objective was to use this unique feature to evaluate possible missingness mechanisms and to assess the accuracy of simple imputation methods.

Methods: Those patients responding after reminder were regarded as providing missing responses. A hypothesis test and a logistic regression approach were used to evaluate the missingness mechanism. Simple imputation procedures were carried out on these missing scores and the results compared to the actual observed scores.

Results: The hypothesis test and logistic regression approaches suggested the reminder data were missing not at random (MNAR). Reminder-response data showed that simple imputation procedures utilising information collected close to the point of imputation (last value carried forward, next value carried backward and last-and-next), were the best methods in this setting. However, although these methods were the best of the simple imputation procedures considered, they were not sufficiently accurate to be confident of obtaining unbiased results under imputation.

Conclusion: The use of the reminder data enabled the conclusion of possible MNAR data. Evaluating this mechanism was important in determining if imputation was useful. Simple imputation was shown to be inadequate if MNAR are likely and alternative strategies should be considered.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Bias results of EQ5D imputation at the 24 month follow up.
Figure 2
Figure 2
PV results of EQ5D imputation at the 24 month follow up.

References

    1. Rubin DB. Inference and missing data. Biometrika. 1976;72:359–364.
    1. Troxel AB, Fairclough DL, Curran D, Hahn EA. Statistical analysis of quality of life with missing data in cancer clinical trials. Stat Med. 1998;17:653–666. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0258(19980315/15)17:5/7<653::AID-SIM812>3.0.CO;2-M. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Musil CM, Warner CB, Yobas PK, Jones SL. A comparison of imputation techniques for handling missing data. West J Nurs Res. 2002;24:815–829. doi: 10.1177/019394502762477004. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Myers WR. Handling missing data in clinical trials: An overview. Drug Inf J. 2000;34:525–533.
    1. Twisk J, de Vente W. Attrition in longitudinal studies: how to deal with missing data. J Clin Epidemiol. 2002;55:329–337. doi: 10.1016/S0895-4356(01)00476-0. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources