ReviewDrug and alcohol dependence2023
Methods for handling missing binary data in substance use disorder trials.
Review in Drug and alcohol dependence, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy and Safety of Modafinil for Treatment of Amphetamine-Type Stimulant Use Disorder: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trials: Efficacité et innocuité du modafinil pour le traitement des troubles liés à l'usage de stimulants de type amphétamine : revue systématique et méta-analyse d'essais randomisés contrôlés par placebo.Canadian journal of psychiatry. Revue canadienne de psychiatrie · 2024Pooled it
- Mind the Gap: Addressing Missing Person Time When Estimating Outcome Incidence in Longitudinal Data.Epidemiology (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2026Article
- Association Between GABRG2 and Self-Rating of the Effects of Alcohol in a French Young Adult Sample.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2025Article
- Predictors of urine toxicology and other biologic specimen missingness in randomized trials of substance use disorders.Drug and alcohol dependence · 2024Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Missing data are a ubiquitous problem in longitudinal substance use disorder (SUD) clinical trials. In particular, the rates of missingness are often high and study participants often intermittently skip their scheduled outcome assessments, leading to so-called "non-monotone" missing data patterns. Moreover, when the primary outcome is a measure of substance use, study investigators often have strong prior beliefs based on their clinical experience that those participants with missing data are more likely to be using substances at those occasions, i.e., data are missing not at random (MNAR). Although approaches for handling missing data are well-developed when the missing data patterns are monotone, arising primarily from study participants withdrawing from the trial prematurely, fewer methods are available for non-monotone missingness. In this paper we review some conventional, as well as more novel, methods for handling non-monotone missingness in SUD trials when the repeatedly measured outcome variable is binary (e.g., denoting presence/absence of substance use). We compare and contrast the different approaches using data from a longitudinal clinical trial of four psychosocial treatments from the Collaborative Cocaine Treatment Study. We conclude by making some recommendations to the SUD research community concerning how more principled methods for handling missing data can be incorporated in the analysis and reporting of trial results.
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.