ArticleBiometrika2025
Resampling methods with multiply imputed data.
Article in Biometrika, 2025. 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.
- Age-associated differences in cervical sagittal alignment parameters among asymptomatic adults: a cross-sectional reference study.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Resampling techniques have become increasingly popular for estimation of uncertainty. However, data are often fraught with missing values that are commonly imputed to facilitate analysis. This article addresses the issue of using resampling methods such as a jackknife or bootstrap in conjunction with imputations that have been sampled stochastically, in the vein of multiple imputation. We derive the theory needed to illustrate two key points regarding the use of resampling methods in lieu of traditional combining rules. First, imputations should be independently generated multiple times within each replicate group of a jackknife or bootstrap. Second, the number of multiply imputed datasets per replicate group must dramatically exceed the number of replicate groups for a jackknife; however, this is not the case in a bootstrap approach. We also discuss bias-adjusted analogues of the jackknife and bootstrap that are argued to require fewer imputed datasets. A simulation study is provided to support these theoretical conclusions.
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.