Accounting for missing data in statistical analyses: multiple imputation is not always the answer
University of Bristol · MRC Epidemiology Unit · +1 more institution
Abstract
Missing data are unavoidable in epidemiological research, potentially leading to bias and loss of precision. Multiple imputation (MI) is widely advocated as an improvement over complete case analysis (CCA). However, contrary to widespread belief, CCA is preferable to MI in some situations.
We provide guidance on choice of analysis when data are incomplete. Using causal diagrams to depict missingness mechanisms, we describe when CCA will not be biased by missing data and compare MI and CCA, with respect to bias and efficiency, in a range of missing data situations. We illustrate selection of an appropriate method in practice.
Citation impact
- FWCI
- 79.18
- Percentile
- 100%
- References
- 72
Authors
4- RARachael A. HughesCorresponding
University of Bristol, MRC Epidemiology Unit
- JHJon Heron
University of Bristol, NIHR Bristol Biomedical Research Centre, MRC Epidemiology Unit
- JAJonathan A C Sterne
University of Bristol, NIHR Bristol Biomedical Research Centre
- KTKate Tilling
University of Bristol, NIHR Bristol Biomedical Research Centre, MRC Epidemiology Unit
Topics & keywords
- Missing data
- Imputation (statistics)
- Covariate
- Computer science
- Data mining
- Statistics
- Selection bias
- Econometrics
- Good health and well-being
Funding
- NBNIHR Bristol Biomedical Research Centre
- NINational Institute for Health and Care ResearchAwards: NF-SI-0611-10168, NF-SI-0611–10168
- BHBritish Heart Foundation
- ARAlcohol Research UKAward: MR/L022206/1
- UOUniversity of BristolAward: MC_UU_00011/3
- MRMedical Research CouncilAwards: MR/L022206/1, MR/J013773/1, MC_UU_00011/3, MR/J013773/1, MC_UU_00011/3, MC_UU_00011