Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36222655›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of epidemiology2023

Missing Outcome Data in Epidemiologic Studies.

Stephen R Cole, Paul N Zivich, Jessie K Edwards, Rachael K Ross, Bonnie E Shook-Sa, Joan T Price, Jeffrey S A Stringer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of epidemiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Racialized economic segregation in relation to fecundability in a preconception cohort study.Journal of urban health : bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. FIVE AUTHORS REPLY.American journal of epidemiology · 2024
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Stephen R Cole
Paul N Zivich
Jessie K Edwards
Rachael K Ross
Bonnie E Shook-Sa
Joan T Price
Jeffrey S A Stringer

Funding

Virology, Immunology, and Microbiology CoreP30AI050410 · NIAID · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI DAVID M. MARGOLIS · 2001 to 2026
$76.9M
UNC MACS/WIHS Combined Cohort Study Clinical Research SiteU01HL146194 · NHLBI · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI Michael Bradley Drummond, Michelle Floris-Moore · 2019 to 2026
$23.2M
University of North Carolina Womens Interagency HIV Study UNC WIHSU01AI103390 · NIAID · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI ADIMORA, ADAORA A · 2013 to 2018
$11.0M
Training in Sexually Transmitted Infections and HIVT32AI007001 · NIAID · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI SENA-SOBERANO, ARLENE C. · 1985 to 2025
$10.9M
Research Services CoreP2CHD050924 · NICHD · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI KAREN B GUZZO · 2015 to 2026
$9.6M
Improved analysis of experiments and observational studies in HIVR01AI157758 · NIAID · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI Stephen R Cole, Jessie Edwards · 2020 to 2026
$5.0M
Training Program in Reproductive, Perinatal, and Pediatric EpidemiologyT32HD052468 · NICHD · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI Julie L Daniels · 2008 to 2026
$3.8M
A Randomized Trial of 17-Hydroxyprogesterone Caproate (17P) to Reduce Preterm Birth Among Women Receiving Antiretroviral Therapy in PregnancyR01HD087119 · NICHD · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI STRINGER, JEFFREY SAMUEL ALLEN · 2016 to 2020
$2.6M
A Career Development Award in HIV-Associated Preterm Birth and its PreventionK01TW010857 · FIC · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI PRICE, JOAN · 2017 to 2021
$682k
FIC NIH HHS K01 TW010857NHLBI NIH HHS U01 HL146194NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI157758NIAID NIH HHS T32 AI007001NICHD NIH HHS P2C HD050924NICHD NIH HHS R01 HD087119NICHD NIH HHS T32 HD052468
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Missing data are pandemic and a central problem for epidemiology. Missing data reduce precision and can cause notable bias. There remain too few simple published examples detailing types of missing data and illustrating their possible impact on results. Here we take an example randomized trial that was not subject to missing data and induce missing data to illustrate 4 scenarios in which outcomes are 1) missing completely at random, 2) missing at random with positivity, 3) missing at random without positivity, and 4) missing not at random. We demonstrate that accounting for missing data is generally a better strategy than ignoring missing data, which unfortunately remains a standard approach in epidemiology.

Indexed as

Data Interpretation, StatisticalEpidemiologic StudiesBiasHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as Topicbiaserrorgeneralized computationimputationmissing dataprecision

Identifiers

PMID36222655
PMCPMC10144620

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.