Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29731541›Full record

ArticleStatistical science : a review journal of the Institute of Mathematical Statistics2018

Introduction to Double Robust Methods for Incomplete Data.

Shaun R Seaman, Stijn Vansteelandt

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Statistical science : a review journal of the Institute of Mathematical Statistics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. A framework for understanding selection bias in real-world healthcare data.Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A, (Statistics in Society) · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Quantifying bias due to missing data in quality of life surveys of advanced-stage cancer patients.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Introduction to Double Robust Methods for Incomplete Data.Statistical science : a review journal of the Institute of Mathematical Statistics · 2018
    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

2 authors.

Shaun R SeamanMedical Research Council Biostatistics Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Stijn VansteelandtDepartment of Applied Mathematics, Computer Science and Statistics, Ghent University, Gent, Belgium.

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_U105260558Medical Research Council MC_UU_00002/10
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Most methods for handling incomplete data can be broadly classified as inverse probability weighting (IPW) strategies or imputation strategies. The former model the occurrence of incomplete data; the latter, the distribution of the missing variables given observed variables in each missingness pattern. Imputation strategies are typically more efficient, but they can involve extrapolation, which is difficult to diagnose and can lead to large bias. Double robust (DR) methods combine the two approaches. They are typically more efficient than IPW and more robust to model misspecification than imputation. We give a formal introduction to DR estimation of the mean of a partially observed variable, before moving to more general incomplete-data scenarios. We review strategies to improve the performance of DR estimators under model misspecification, reveal connections between DR estimators for incomplete data and 'design-consistent' estimators used in sample surveys, and explain the value of double robustness when using flexible data-adaptive methods for IPW or imputation.

Indexed as

augmented inverse probability weightingcalibration estimatorsdata-adaptive methodsdoubly robustempirical likelihoodimputationinverse probability weightingmissing dataprimary – 62 Statisticssecondary – 62A01 Foundations and philosophical topicssemiparametric methods

Identifiers

PMID29731541
PMCPMC5935236

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.