Accounting for not‐at‐random missingness through imputation stacking
dc.contributor.author | Beesley, Lauren J. | |
dc.contributor.author | Taylor, Jeremy M. G. | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-12-02T02:31:00Z | |
dc.date.available | 2022-12-01 21:30:58 | en |
dc.date.available | 2021-12-02T02:31:00Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2021-11-30 | |
dc.identifier.citation | Beesley, Lauren J.; Taylor, Jeremy M. G. (2021). "Accounting for not‐at‐random missingness through imputation stacking." Statistics in Medicine 40(27): 6118-6132. | |
dc.identifier.issn | 0277-6715 | |
dc.identifier.issn | 1097-0258 | |
dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/171019 | |
dc.description.abstract | Not‐at‐random missingness presents a challenge in addressing missing data in many health research applications. In this article, we propose a new approach to account for not‐at‐random missingness after multiple imputation through weighted analysis of stacked multiple imputations. The weights are easily calculated as a function of the imputed data and assumptions about the not‐at‐random missingness. We demonstrate through simulation that the proposed method has excellent performance when the missingness model is correctly specified. In practice, the missingness mechanism will not be known. We show how we can use our approach in a sensitivity analysis framework to evaluate the robustness of model inference to different assumptions about the missingness mechanism, and we provide R package StackImpute to facilitate implementation as part of routine sensitivity analyses. We apply the proposed method to account for not‐at‐random missingness in human papillomavirus test results in a study of survival for patients diagnosed with oropharyngeal cancer. | |
dc.publisher | John Wiley and Sons, Inc | |
dc.subject.other | stacked imputation | |
dc.subject.other | chained equations multiple imputation | |
dc.subject.other | fully conditional specification | |
dc.subject.other | not‐at‐random missingness | |
dc.subject.other | sensitivity analysis | |
dc.title | Accounting for not‐at‐random missingness through imputation stacking | |
dc.type | Article | |
dc.rights.robots | IndexNoFollow | |
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevel | Statistics and Numeric Data | |
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevel | Public Health | |
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevel | Medicine (General) | |
dc.subject.hlbtoplevel | Social Sciences | |
dc.subject.hlbtoplevel | Health Sciences | |
dc.subject.hlbtoplevel | Science | |
dc.description.peerreviewed | Peer Reviewed | |
dc.description.bitstreamurl | http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/171019/1/sim9174-sup-0001-supinfo.pdf | |
dc.description.bitstreamurl | http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/171019/2/sim9174_am.pdf | |
dc.description.bitstreamurl | http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/171019/3/sim9174.pdf | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1002/sim.9174 | |
dc.identifier.source | Statistics in Medicine | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Wang N, Robins JM. Large‐sample theory for parametric multiple imputation procedures. Biometrika. 1998; 85 ( 4 ): 935 ‐ 948. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Rubin DB. Multiple Imputation for Nonresponse in Surveys. 1st ed. New York, NY: John Wiley and Sons, Inc; 1987. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Raghunathan TE. A multivariate technique for multiply imputing missing values using a sequence of regression models. Surv Methodol. 2001; 27 ( 1 ): 85 ‐ 95. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Van Buuren S, Brand JPL, Groothuis‐Oudshoorn CGM, Rubin DB. Fully conditional specification in multivariate imputation. J Stat Comput Simul. 2006; 76 ( 12 ): 1049 ‐ 1064. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Little RJA, Rubin DB. Statistical Analysis with Missing Data. 2nd ed. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley and Sons, Inc; 2002. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Tompsett DM, Leacy F, Moreno‐Betancur M, Heron J, White IR. On the use of the not‐at‐random fully conditional specification (NARFCS) procedure in practice. Stat Med. 2018; 37 ( 15 ): 2338 ‐ 2353. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.7643 | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Jolani S. Dual Imputation Strategies for Analyzing Incomplete Data PhD thesis. Utrecht University; 2012. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Carpenter JR, Kenward MG, White IR. Sensitivity analysis after multiple imputation under missing at random: a weighting approach. Stat Methods Med Res. 2007; 16 ( 3 ): 259 ‐ 275. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Rezvan PH, White IR, Lee KJ, Carlin JB, Simpson JA. Evaluation of a weighting approach for performing sensitivity analysis after multiple imputation. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2015; 15 ( 83 ): 1 ‐ 16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874‐015‐0074‐2 | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Smuk M. Missing Data Methodology: Sensitivity Analysis after Multiple Imputation PhD thesis. London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine; 2015. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Beesley LJ, Taylor JMG. A stacked approach for chained equations multiple imputation incorporating the substantive model. Biometrics. 2020; 1 ‐ 13. https://doi.org/10.1111/biom.13372 | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Bernhardt P. A comparison of stacked and pooled multiple imputation. Paper presented at: Proceedings of the Joint Statistical Meetings Poster Presentation; 2019: Denver, Colorado, USA. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Tanner MA. Methods for the Exploration of Posterior Distributions and Likelihood Functions. 2nd ed. New York, NY: Springer; 1993. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Carpenter JR, Roger JH, Kenward MG. Analysis of longitudinal trials with protocol deviation: a framework for relevant, accessible assumptions, and inference via multiple imputation. J Biopharm Stat. 2013; 23 ( 6 ): 1352 ‐ 1371. https://doi.org/10.1080/10543406.2013.834911 | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Wood AM, White IR, Royston P. How should variable selection be performed with multiply imputed data? Stat Med. 2008; 27: 3227 ‐ 3246. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Louis TA. Finding the observed information matrix when using the EM algorithm. J R Stat Soc. 1982; 44 ( 2 ): 226 ‐ 233. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Ratitch B, Kelly MO, Tosiello R. Missing data in clinical trials: from clinical assumptions to statistical analysis using pattern mixture models. Pharm Stat. 2013; 12 ( 6 ): 337 ‐ 347. https://doi.org/10.1002/pst.1549 | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Tompsett D, Sutton S, Seaman SR, White IR. A general method for elicitation, imputation, and sensitivity analysis for incomplete repeated binary data. Stat Med. 2020; 39 ( 22 ): 2921 ‐ 2935. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.8584 | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Rezvan PH, Lee KJ, Simpson JA. Sensitivity analysis within multiple imputation framework using delta‐adjustment: application to longitudinal study of Australian children. Longitud Life Course Stud. 2018; 9 ( 3 ): 259 ‐ 278. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Héraud‐Bousquet V, Larsen C, Carpenter J, Desenclos JC, Strat YL. Practical considerations for sensitivity analysis after multiple imputation applied to epidemiological studies with incomplete data. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2012; 12 ( 73 ): 1 ‐ 11. | |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Beesley LJ, Hawkins PG, Amlani LM, et al. Individualized survival prediction for patients with oropharyngeal cancer in the human papillomavirus era. Cancer. 2019; 125 ( 1 ): 69 ‐ 78. | |
dc.working.doi | NO | en |
dc.owningcollname | Interdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed |
Files in this item
Remediation of Harmful Language
The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.
Accessibility
If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.