Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36725096›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2023

Handling of missing data with multiple imputation in observational studies that address causal questions: protocol for a scoping review.

Rheanna Mainzer, Margarita Moreno-Betancur, Cattram Nguyen, Julie Simpson, John Carlin, Katherine Lee

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. To Impute or Not To Impute in Untargeted Metabolomics─That is the Compositional Question.Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Clinical study types and guidance for their correct post-pandemic interpretation.Revista espanola de quimioterapia : publicacion oficial de la Sociedad Espanola de Quimioterapia · 2024
    Review
  5. 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

6 authors.

Rheanna MainzerClinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics Unit, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Parkville, Victoria, Australia rheanna.mainzer@mcri.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0002-5933-8917
Margarita Moreno-BetancurClinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics Unit, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.
Cattram NguyenClinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics Unit, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-0599-8645
Julie SimpsonSchool of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.
John CarlinClinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics Unit, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.
Katherine LeeClinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics Unit, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionObservational studies in health-related research often aim to answer causal questions. Missing data are common in these studies and often occur in multiple variables, such as the exposure, outcome and/or variables used to control for confounding. The standard classification of missing data as missing completely at random, missing at random (MAR) or missing not at random does not allow for a clear assessment of missingness assumptions when missingness arises in more than one variable. This presents challenges for selecting an analytic approach and determining when a sensitivity analysis under plausible alternative missing data assumptions is required. This is particularly pertinent with multiple imputation (MI), which is often justified by assuming data are MAR. The objective of this scoping review is to examine the use of MI in observational studies that address causal questions, with a focus on if and how (a) missingness assumptions are expressed and assessed, (b) missingness assumptions are used to justify the choice of a complete case analysis and/or MI for handling missing data and (c) sensitivity analyses under alternative plausible assumptions about the missingness mechanism are conducted. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will review observational studies that aim to answer causal questions and use MI, published between January 2019 and December 2021 in five top general epidemiology journals. Studies will be identified using a full text search for the term 'multiple imputation' and then assessed for eligibility. Information extracted will include details about the study characteristics, missing data, missingness assumptions and MI implementation. Data will be summarised using descriptive statistics. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval is not required for this review because data will be collected only from published studies. The results will be disseminated through a peer reviewed publication and conference presentations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: This protocol is registered on figshare (https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.20010497.v1).

Indexed as

Models, StatisticalResearch DesignData Interpretation, StatisticalHumansObservational Studies as TopicScoping Reviews as Topicepidemiologypublic healthstatistics & research methods

Identifiers

PMID36725096
PMCPMC9896184

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.