Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33624862›Full record

ReviewBiometrical journal. Biometrische Zeitschrift2021

Missing data: A statistical framework for practice.

James R Carpenter, Melanie Smuk

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Biometrical journal. Biometrische Zeitschrift, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 91 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
91citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

91 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. How to assess applicability and methodological quality of comparative studies of operative interventions in orthopedic trauma surgery.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2022
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Evaluating the statistical realism of LLM-generated social science data.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

31 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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.

James R CarpenterDepartment of Medical Statistics, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3890-6206
Melanie SmukDepartment of Medical Statistics, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-1594-1458

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_UU_00004/07Medical Research Council MC_UU_12023/21Medical Research Council MC_UU_12023/29
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Missing data are ubiquitous in medical research, yet there is still uncertainty over when restricting to the complete records is likely to be acceptable, when more complex methods (e.g. maximum likelihood, multiple imputation and Bayesian methods) should be used, how they relate to each other and the role of sensitivity analysis. This article seeks to address both applied practitioners and researchers interested in a more formal explanation of some of the results. For practitioners, the framework, illustrative examples and code should equip them with a practical approach to address the issues raised by missing data (particularly using multiple imputation), alongside an overview of how the various approaches in the literature relate. In particular, we describe how multiple imputation can be readily used for sensitivity analyses, which are still infrequently performed. For those interested in more formal derivations, we give outline arguments for key results, use simple examples to show how methods relate, and references for full details. The ideas are illustrated with a cohort study, a multi-centre case control study and a randomised clinical trial.

Indexed as

Case-Control StudiesBayes TheoremCohort StudiesData Interpretation, StatisticalHumansUncertaintycomplete recordsmissing datamultiple imputationsensitivity analysis

Identifiers

PMID33624862
PMCPMC7615108

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.