Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42112406›Full record

ArticleObservational studies2026

Outcome-Assisted Multiple Imputation of Missing Treatments.

Joseph Feldman, Jerome P Reiter

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Observational studies, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Joseph FeldmanStatistics and Data Science Washington University in St. Louis.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0004-3253-2105
Jerome P ReiterStatistical Science Duke University.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We provide guidance on multiple imputation of missing at random treatments in observational studies. Specifically, analysts should account for both covariates and outcomes, i.e., not just use propensity scores, when imputing the missing treatments. To do so, we develop outcome-assisted multiple imputation of missing treatments: the analyst fits a regression for the outcome on the treatment indicator and covariates, which is used to sharpen the predictive probabilities for missing treatments under an estimated propensity score model. We derive an expression for the bias of the inverse probability weighted estimator for the average treatment effect under multiple imputation of missing treatments, and we show theoretically that this bias can be made small by using outcome-assisted multiple imputation. Simulations demonstrate empirically that outcome-assisted multiple imputation can offer better inferential properties than using the treatment assignment model alone. We illustrate the procedure in an analysis of data from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth.

Indexed as

Causal inferencemissing dataobservational studypropensity scoreweighting

Identifiers

PMID42112406
PMCPMC13155361

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.