Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29674311›Full record

ArticleJMIR mental health2018

"Wish You Were Here": Examining Characteristics, Outcomes, and Statistical Solutions for Missing Cases in Web-Based Psychotherapeutic Trials.

Eyal Karin, Blake F Dear, Gillian Z Heller, Monique F Crane, Nickolai Titov

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR mental health, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing 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

26 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Intolerance of Uncertainty as a Central Influence on Social Media Use: A School-Based Program for Adolescents.Prevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research · 2024
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Observational
  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

5 authors.

Eyal KarineCentreClinic, Department of Psychology, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6152-9704
Blake F DeareCentreClinic, Department of Psychology, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9324-3092
Gillian Z HellerDepartment of Statistics, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1270-1499
Monique F CraneDepartment of Psychology, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4943-7962
Nickolai TitoveCentreClinic, Department of Psychology, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7268-729X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMissing cases following treatment are common in Web-based psychotherapy trials. Without the ability to directly measure and evaluate the outcomes for missing cases, the ability to measure and evaluate the effects of treatment is challenging. Although common, little is known about the characteristics of Web-based psychotherapy participants who present as missing cases, their likely clinical outcomes, or the suitability of different statistical assumptions that can characterize missing cases.

objectiveUsing a large sample of individuals who underwent Web-based psychotherapy for depressive symptoms (n=820), the aim of this study was to explore the characteristics of cases who present as missing cases at posttreatment (n=138), their likely treatment outcomes, and compare between statistical methods for replacing their missing data.

methodsFirst, common participant and treatment features were tested through binary logistic regression models, evaluating the ability to predict missing cases. Second, the same variables were screened for their ability to increase or impede the rate symptom change that was observed following treatment. Third, using recontacted cases at 3-month follow-up to proximally represent missing cases outcomes following treatment, various simulated replacement scores were compared and evaluated against observed clinical follow-up scores.

resultsMissing cases were dominantly predicted by lower treatment adherence and increased symptoms at pretreatment. Statistical methods that ignored these characteristics can overlook an important clinical phenomenon and consequently produce inaccurate replacement outcomes, with symptoms estimates that can swing from -32% to 70% from the observed outcomes of recontacted cases. In contrast, longitudinal statistical methods that adjusted their estimates for missing cases outcomes by treatment adherence rates and baseline symptoms scores resulted in minimal measurement bias (<8%).

conclusionsCertain variables can characterize and predict missing cases likelihood and jointly predict lesser clinical improvement. Under such circumstances, individuals with potentially worst off treatment outcomes can become concealed, and failure to adjust for this can lead to substantial clinical measurement bias. Together, this preliminary research suggests that missing cases in Web-based psychotherapeutic interventions may not occur as random events and can be systematically predicted. Critically, at the same time, missing cases may experience outcomes that are distinct and important for a complete understanding of the treatment effect.

Indexed as

missing datapsychotherapystatistical biastreatment adherence and compliancetreatment efficacy

Identifiers

PMID29674311
PMCPMC5938693

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.