Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40440333›Full record

ArticlePloS one2025

Impute the missing data by combining retrieved dropouts and return to baseline method.

Xiaozhou Li, Zhenyu Yang, Chuanji Yuan, Jiaqing Liu, Zuojing Li

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

5 authors.

Xiaozhou LiDepartment of Pharmaceutical informatics, School of Shenyang Pharmaceutical University, Shenyang, Liaoning, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0005-3960-3161
Zhenyu YangDepartment of Biostatistics and Data Analysis, Liaoning Yidu Medical Data Technology Co., Ltd., Shenyang, Liaoning, China.
Chuanji YuanDepartment of Pharmaceutical informatics, School of Shenyang Pharmaceutical University, Shenyang, Liaoning, China.
Jiaqing LiuDepartment of Pharmaceutical informatics, School of Shenyang Pharmaceutical University, Shenyang, Liaoning, China.
Zuojing LiDepartment of Pharmaceutical informatics, School of Shenyang Pharmaceutical University, Shenyang, Liaoning, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0814-8459

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Currently, various methods have been proposed to handle missing data in clinical trials. Some methods assume that the missing data are missing at random (MAR), which means that it is assumed that subjects who stopped treatment would still maintain the treatment effect. In many cases, however, researchers often assume that the missing data are missing not at random (MNAR) to conduct additional sensitivity analyses. Under the MNAR assumption, whether using some conservative imputation methods such as RTB (return to baseline) method, J2R (jump to reference) method, and CR (copy reference) method, or optimistic imputation methods like multiple imputation (MI) and its derivative RD (retrieved dropout) method, biases compared to the true treatment effect can occur in some scenarios. This paper aims to propose a method that can impute results while considering the occurrence of intercurrent events, thereby reducing the bias compared to the true treatment effect. This method combines the RD method with the RTB formula, reducing the biases and standard errors associated with using either method alone. Considering the differing treatment effects between RD subjects and non-RD subjects, our imputation results often align more closely with the true drug efficacy.

Indexed as

Clinical Trials as TopicPatient DropoutsAlgorithmsBiasData Interpretation, StatisticalHumansModels, StatisticalResearch Design

Identifiers

PMID40440333
PMCPMC12121747

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.