Should multiple imputation be the method of choice for handling missing data in randomized trials?

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorSullivan, T.R.
dc.contributor.authorWhite, I.R.
dc.contributor.authorSalter, A.B.
dc.contributor.authorRyan, P.
dc.contributor.authorLee, K.J.
dc.date.issued2018
dc.description.abstractThe use of multiple imputation has increased markedly in recent years, and journal reviewers may expect to see multiple imputation used to handle missing data. However in randomized trials, where treatment group is always observed and independent of baseline covariates, other approaches may be preferable. Using data simulation we evaluated multiple imputation, performed both overall and separately by randomized group, across a range of commonly encountered scenarios. We considered both missing outcome and missing baseline data, with missing outcome data induced under missing at random mechanisms. Provided the analysis model was correctly specified, multiple imputation produced unbiased treatment effect estimates, but alternative unbiased approaches were often more efficient. When the analysis model overlooked an interaction effect involving randomized group, multiple imputation produced biased estimates of the average treatment effect when applied to missing outcome data, unless imputation was performed separately by randomized group. Based on these results, we conclude that multiple imputation should not be seen as the only acceptable way to handle missing data in randomized trials. In settings where multiple imputation is adopted, we recommend that imputation is carried out separately by randomized group.
dc.description.statementofresponsibilityThomas R Sullivan, Ian R White, Amy B Salter, Philip Ryan, Katherine J Lee
dc.identifier.citationStatistical Methods in Medical Research, 2018; 27(9):2610-2626
dc.identifier.doi10.1177/0962280216683570
dc.identifier.issn0962-2802
dc.identifier.issn1477-0334
dc.identifier.orcidSullivan, T.R. [0000-0002-6930-5406]
dc.identifier.orcidSalter, A.B. [0000-0002-2881-0684]
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2440/122008
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherSAGE Journals
dc.relation.granthttp://purl.org/au-research/grants/nhmrc/1053609
dc.rights© The Author(s) 2016. Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported (CC BY-NC 3.0).
dc.source.urihttps://doi.org/10.1177/0962280216683570
dc.subjectclinical trials
dc.subjectintention to treat
dc.subjectlinear mixed model
dc.subjectmissing data
dc.subjectmultiple imputation
dc.titleShould multiple imputation be the method of choice for handling missing data in randomized trials?
dc.typeJournal article
pubs.publication-statusPublished

Files

Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
hdl_122008.pdf
Size:
862.42 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Published version
Download

Collections

Public Health publications