ArticleBiometrics2019
A sensitivity analysis approach for informative dropout using shared parameter models.
Article in Biometrics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Joint modeling in presence of informative censoring on the retrospective time scale with application to palliative care research.Biostatistics (Oxford, England) · 2024Article
- A sensitivity analysis approach for informative dropout using shared parameter models.Biometrics · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Shared parameter models (SPMs) are a useful approach to addressing bias from informative dropout in longitudinal studies. In SPMs it is typically assumed that the longitudinal outcome process and the dropout time are independent, given random effects and observed covariates. However, this conditional independence assumption is unverifiable. Currently, sensitivity analysis strategies for this unverifiable assumption of SPMs are underdeveloped. In principle, parameters that can and cannot be identified by the observed data should be clearly separated in sensitivity analyses, and sensitivity parameters should not influence the model fit to the observed data. For SPMs this is difficult because it is not clear how to separate the observed data likelihood from the distribution of the missing data given the observed data (i.e., 'extrapolation distribution'). In this article, we propose a new approach for transparent sensitivity analyses for informative dropout that separates the observed data likelihood and the extrapolation distribution, using a typical SPM as a working model for the complete data generating mechanism. For this model, the default extrapolation distribution is a skew-normal distribution (i.e., it is available in a closed form). We propose anchoring the sensitivity analysis on the default extrapolation distribution under the specified SPM and calibrate the sensitivity parameters using the observed data for subjects who drop out. The proposed approach is used to address informative dropout in the HIV Epidemiology Research Study.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.