ArticleStatistics in medicine2024
Double Sampling for Informatively Missing Data in Electronic Health Record-Based Comparative Effectiveness Research.
Article in Statistics in medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Estimating weighted quantile treatment effects with missing outcome data by double sampling.Biometrics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Missing data arise in most applied settings and are ubiquitous in electronic health records (EHR). When data are missing not at random (MNAR) with respect to measured covariates, sensitivity analyses are often considered. These solutions, however, are often unsatisfying in that they are not guaranteed to yield actionable conclusions. Motivated by an EHR-based study of long-term outcomes following bariatric surgery, we consider the use of double sampling as a means to mitigate MNAR outcome data when the statistical goals are estimation and inference regarding causal effects. We describe assumptions that are sufficient for the identification of the joint distribution of confounders, treatment, and outcome under this design. Additionally, we derive efficient and robust estimators of the average causal treatment effect under a nonparametric model and under a model assuming outcomes were, in fact, initially missing at random (MAR). We compare these in simulations to an approach that adaptively estimates based on evidence of violation of the MAR assumption. Finally, we also show that the proposed double sampling design can be extended to handle arbitrary coarsening mechanisms, and derive nonparametric efficient estimators of any smooth full data functional.
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.