ArticleStatistical methods in medical research2025
Multiple imputation for systematically missing effect modifiers in individual participant data meta-analysis.
Article in Statistical methods in medical research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis of randomised trials is a crucial method for detecting and investigating effect modifications in medical research. However, few studies have explored scenarios involving systematically missing data on discrete effect modifiers (EMs) in IPD meta-analyses with a limited number of trials. This simulation study examines the impact of systematic missing values in IPD meta-analysis using a two-stage imputation method. We simulated IPD meta-analyses of randomised trials with multiple studies that had systematically missing data on the EM. A multivariable Weibull survival model was specified to assess beneficial (Hazard Ratio (HR)
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.