Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30868652›Full record

ArticleBiometrical journal. Biometrische Zeitschrift2019

Multiple imputation for discrete data: Evaluation of the joint latent normal model.

Matteo Quartagno, James R Carpenter

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biometrical journal. Biometrische Zeitschrift, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

28 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Assessing Alternative Imputation Strategies for Infrequently Missing Items on Multi-item Scales.Communications in statistics. Case studies, data analysis and applications · 2022
    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

2 authors.

Matteo QuartagnoDepartment of Medical Statistics, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-4446-0730
James R CarpenterDepartment of Medical Statistics, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_UU_12023/21Medical Research Council MC_UU_12023/29
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Missing data are ubiquitous in clinical and social research, and multiple imputation (MI) is increasingly the methodology of choice for practitioners. Two principal strategies for imputation have been proposed in the literature: joint modelling multiple imputation (JM-MI) and full conditional specification multiple imputation (FCS-MI). While JM-MI is arguably a preferable approach, because it involves specification of an explicit imputation model, FCS-MI is pragmatically appealing, because of its flexibility in handling different types of variables. JM-MI has developed from the multivariate normal model, and latent normal variables have been proposed as a natural way to extend this model to handle categorical variables. In this article, we evaluate the latent normal model through an extensive simulation study and an application on data from the German Breast Cancer Study Group, comparing the results with FCS-MI. We divide our investigation in four sections, focusing on (i) binary, (ii) categorical, (iii) ordinal, and (iv) count data. Using data simulated from both the latent normal model and the general location model, we find that in all but one extreme general location model setting JM-MI works very well, and sometimes outperforms FCS-MI. We conclude the latent normal model, implemented in the R package jomo, can be used with confidence by researchers, both for single and multilevel multiple imputation.

Indexed as

Models, StatisticalBiometryBreast NeoplasmsHumansLogistic ModelsMultivariate Analysiscategorical datajoint modellatent normal modelmissing datamultiple imputation

Identifiers

PMID30868652
PMCPMC6618333

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.