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

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Objective</p> <p>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...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Fayers Peter M, Fielding Shona, McDonald Alison, McPherson Gladys, Campbell Marion K
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2008-08-01
Series:Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
Online Access:http://www.hqlo.com/content/6/1/57
_version_ 1819122482151424000
author Fayers Peter M
Fielding Shona
McDonald Alison
McPherson Gladys
Campbell Marion K
author_facet Fayers Peter M
Fielding Shona
McDonald Alison
McPherson Gladys
Campbell Marion K
author_sort Fayers Peter M
collection DOAJ
description <p>Abstract</p> <p>Objective</p> <p>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.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>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.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>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.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>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.</p>
first_indexed 2024-12-22T06:53:09Z
format Article
id doaj.art-b3e19637b1cd4222bb750083cd010431
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1477-7525
language English
last_indexed 2024-12-22T06:53:09Z
publishDate 2008-08-01
publisher BMC
record_format Article
series Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
spelling doaj.art-b3e19637b1cd4222bb750083cd0104312022-12-21T18:35:04ZengBMCHealth and Quality of Life Outcomes1477-75252008-08-01615710.1186/1477-7525-6-57Simple imputation methods were inadequate for missing not at random (MNAR) quality of life dataFayers Peter MFielding ShonaMcDonald AlisonMcPherson GladysCampbell Marion K<p>Abstract</p> <p>Objective</p> <p>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.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>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.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>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.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>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.</p>http://www.hqlo.com/content/6/1/57
spellingShingle Fayers Peter M
Fielding Shona
McDonald Alison
McPherson Gladys
Campbell Marion K
Simple imputation methods were inadequate for missing not at random (MNAR) quality of life data
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
title Simple imputation methods were inadequate for missing not at random (MNAR) quality of life data
title_full Simple imputation methods were inadequate for missing not at random (MNAR) quality of life data
title_fullStr Simple imputation methods were inadequate for missing not at random (MNAR) quality of life data
title_full_unstemmed Simple imputation methods were inadequate for missing not at random (MNAR) quality of life data
title_short Simple imputation methods were inadequate for missing not at random (MNAR) quality of life data
title_sort simple imputation methods were inadequate for missing not at random mnar quality of life data
url http://www.hqlo.com/content/6/1/57
work_keys_str_mv AT fayerspeterm simpleimputationmethodswereinadequateformissingnotatrandommnarqualityoflifedata
AT fieldingshona simpleimputationmethodswereinadequateformissingnotatrandommnarqualityoflifedata
AT mcdonaldalison simpleimputationmethodswereinadequateformissingnotatrandommnarqualityoflifedata
AT mcphersongladys simpleimputationmethodswereinadequateformissingnotatrandommnarqualityoflifedata
AT campbellmarionk simpleimputationmethodswereinadequateformissingnotatrandommnarqualityoflifedata