Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26210611›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of epidemiology2015

Imputation approaches for potential outcomes in causal inference.

Daniel Westreich, Jessie K Edwards, Stephen R Cole, Robert W Platt, Sunni L Mumford, Enrique F Schisterman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of epidemiology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Model-based standardization using multiple imputation.BMC medical research methodology · 2024
    Article
  7. FIVE AUTHORS REPLY.American journal of epidemiology · 2024
    Article
  8. Study design approaches for future active-controlled HIV prevention trials.Statistical communications in infectious diseases · 2024
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Missing Outcome Data in Epidemiologic Studies.American journal of epidemiology · 2023
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Daniel WestreichDepartment of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health, UNC-Chapel Hill, NC, USA, djw@unc.edu.
Jessie K EdwardsDepartment of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health, UNC-Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Stephen R ColeDepartment of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health, UNC-Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Robert W PlattDepartment of Epidemiology, Biostatistics, and Occupational Health, McGill University, QC, Canada and.
Sunni L MumfordEpidemiology Branch, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Enrique F SchistermanEpidemiology Branch, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, Bethesda, MD, USA.

Funding

ROC Curve MethodologyZIAHD008761 · NICHD · EUNICE KENNEDY SHRIVER NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF CHILD HEALTH & HUMAN DEVELOPMENT · PI SCHISTERMAN, ENRIQUE F. · 2009 to 2021
$2.1M
Intramural NIH HHS
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe fundamental problem of causal inference is one of missing data, and specifically of missing potential outcomes: if potential outcomes were fully observed, then causal inference could be made trivially. Though often not discussed explicitly in the epidemiological literature, the connections between causal inference and missing data can provide additional intuition.

methodsWe demonstrate how we can approach causal inference in ways similar to how we address all problems of missing data, using multiple imputation and the parametric g-formula.

resultsWe explain and demonstrate the use of these methods in example data, and discuss implications for more traditional approaches to causal inference.

conclusionsThough there are advantages and disadvantages to both multiple imputation and g-formula approaches, epidemiologists can benefit from thinking about their causal inference problems as problems of missing data, as such perspectives may lend new and clarifying insights to their analyses.

Indexed as

CausalityModels, StatisticalEpidemiologyHumansResearch DesignCausal inferenceg-formulamultiple imputationpotential outcomes

Identifiers

PMID26210611
PMCPMC4707196

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.