A comparison of multiple imputation and doubly robust estimation for analyses with missing data

Summary.  Multiple imputation is now a well-established technique for analysing data sets where some units have incomplete observations. Provided that the imputation model is correct, the resulting estimates are consistent. An alternative, weighting by the inverse probability of observing complete data on a unit, is conceptually simple and involves fewer modelling assumptions, but it is known to be both inefficient (relative to a fully parametric approach) and sensitive to the choice of weighting model. Over the last decade, there has been a considerable body of theoretical work to improve the performance of inverse probability weighting, leading to the development of 'doubly robust' or 'doubly protected' estimators. We present an intuitive review of these developments and contrast these estimators with multiple imputation from both a theoretical and a practical viewpoint.     

Using multiple imputation to estimate cumulative distribution functions in longitudinal data analysis with data missing at random

In longitudinal clinical studies, after randomization at baseline, subjects are followed for a period of time for development of symptoms. The interested inference could be the mean change from baseline to a particular visit in some lab values, the proportion of responders to some threshold category at a particular visit post baseline, or the time to some important event. However, in some applications, the interest may be in estimating the cumulative distribution function (CDF) at a fixed time point post baseline. When the data are fully observed, the CDF can be estimated by the empirical CDF. When patients discontinue prematurely during the course of the study, the empirical CDF cannot be directly used. In this paper, we use multiple imputation as a way to estimate the CDF in longitudinal studies when data are missing at random. The validity of the method is assessed on the basis of the bias and the Kolmogorov–Smirnov distance. The results suggest that multiple imputation yields less bias and less variability than the often used last observation carried forward method. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Empirical likelihood confidence intervals under imputation for missing survey data from stratified simple random sampling

Missing observations due to non‐response are commonly encountered in data collected from sample surveys. The focus of this article is on item non‐response which is often handled by filling in (or imputing) missing values using the observed responses (donors). Random imputation (single or fractional) is used within homogeneous imputation classes that are formed on the basis of categorical auxiliary variables observed on all the sampled units. A uniform response rate within classes is assumed, but that rate is allowed to vary across classes. We construct confidence intervals (CIs) for a population parameter that is defined as the solution to a smooth estimating equation with data collected using stratified simple random sampling. The imputation classes are assumed to be formed across strata. Fractional imputation with a fixed number of random draws is used to obtain an imputed estimating function. An empirical likelihood inference method under the fractional imputation is proposed and its asymptotic properties are derived. Two asymptotically correct bootstrap methods are developed for constructing the desired CIs. In a simulation study, the proposed bootstrap methods are shown to outperform traditional bootstrap methods and some non‐bootstrap competitors under various simulation settings. The Canadian Journal of Statistics 47: 281–301; 2019 © 2019 Statistical Society of Canada     

Multiple imputation of missing data with ante-dependence covariance structure

A controlled clinical trial was conducted to investigate the efficacy effect of a chemical compound in the treatment of Premenstrual Dysphoric Disorder (PMDD). The data from the trial showed a non-monotone pattern of missing data and an ante-dependence covariance structure. A new analytical method for imputing the missing data with the ante-dependence covariance is proposed. The PMDD data are analysed by the non-imputation method and two imputation methods: the proposed method and the MCMC method.     

Coping with missing data in phase III pivotal registration trials: Tolvaptan in subjects with kidney disease,a case study

Missing data cause challenging issues, particularly in phase III registration trials, as highlighted by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) and the US National Research Council. We explore, as a case study, how the issues from missing data were tackled in a double‐blind phase III trial in subjects with autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease. A total of 1445 subjects were randomized in a 2:1 ratio to receive active treatment (tolvaptan), or placebo. The primary outcome, the rate of change in total kidney volume, favored tolvaptan (P < .0001). The key secondary efficacy endpoints of clinical progression of disease and rate of decline in kidney function also favored tolvaptan. However, as highlighted by Food and Drug Administration and EMA, the interpretation of results was hampered by a high number of unevenly distributed dropouts, particularly early dropouts. In this paper, we outline the analyses undertaken to address the issue of missing data thoroughly. “Tipping point analyses” were performed to explore how extreme and detrimental outcomes among subjects with missing data must be to overturn the positive treatment effect attained in those subjects who had complete data. Nonparametric rank‐based analyses were also performed accounting for missing data. In conclusion, straightforward and transparent analyses directly taking into account missing data convincingly support the robustness of the preplanned analyses on the primary and secondary endpoints. Tolvaptan was confirmed to be effective in slowing total kidney volume growth, which is considered an efficacy endpoint by EMA, and in lessening the decline in renal function in patients with autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease.     

Data-driven sensitivity analysis to detect missing data mechanism with applications to structural equation modelling

Missing data are a common problem in almost all areas of empirical research. Ignoring the missing data mechanism, especially when data are missing not at random (MNAR), can result in biased and/or inefficient inference. Because MNAR mechanism is not verifiable based on the observed data, sensitivity analysis is often used to assess it. Current sensitivity analysis methods primarily assume a model for the response mechanism in conjunction with a measurement model and examine sensitivity to missing data mechanism via the parameters of the response model. Recently, Jamshidian and Mata (Post-modelling sensitivity analysis to detect the effect of missing data mechanism, Multivariate Behav. Res. 43 (2008), pp. 432–452) introduced a new method of sensitivity analysis that does not require the difficult task of modelling the missing data mechanism. In this method, a single measurement model is fitted to all of the data and to a sub-sample of the data. Discrepancy in the parameter estimates obtained from the the two data sets is used as a measure of sensitivity to missing data mechanism. Jamshidian and Mata describe their method mainly in the context of detecting data that are missing completely at random (MCAR). They used a bootstrap type method, that relies on heuristic input from the researcher, to test for the discrepancy of the parameter estimates. Instead of using bootstrap, the current article obtains confidence interval for parameter differences on two samples based on an asymptotic approximation. Because it does not use bootstrap, the developed procedure avoids likely convergence problems with the bootstrap methods. It does not require heuristic input from the researcher and can be readily implemented in statistical software. The article also discusses methods of obtaining sub-samples that may be used to test missing at random in addition to MCAR. An application of the developed procedure to a real data set, from the first wave of an ongoing longitudinal study on aging, is presented. Simulation studies are performed as well, using two methods of missing data generation, which show promise for the proposed sensitivity method. One method of missing data generation is also new and interesting in its own right.     

Multiple imputation methods for recurrent event data with missing event category

Frequently in clinical and epidemiologic studies, the event of interest is recurrent (i.e., can occur more than once per subject). When the events are not of the same type, an analysis which accounts for the fact that events fall into different categories will often be more informative. Often, however, although event times may always be known, information through which events are categorized may potentially be missing. Complete‐case methods (whose application may require, for example, that events be censored when their category cannot be determined) are valid only when event categories are missing completely at random. This assumption is rather restrictive. The authors propose two multiple imputation methods for analyzing multiple‐category recurrent event data under the proportional means/rates model. The use of a proper or improper imputation technique distinguishes the two approaches. Both methods lead to consistent estimation of regression parameters even when the missingness of event categories depends on covariates. The authors derive the asymptotic properties of the estimators and examine their behaviour in finite samples through simulation. They illustrate their approach using data from an international study on dialysis.     

Multiple imputation for ordinal longitudinal data with monotone missing data patterns

Missing data often complicate the analysis of scientific data. Multiple imputation is a general purpose technique for analysis of datasets with missing values. The approach is applicable to a variety of missing data patterns but often complicated by some restrictions like the type of variables to be imputed and the mechanism underlying the missing data. In this paper, the authors compare the performance of two multiple imputation methods, namely fully conditional specification and multivariate normal imputation in the presence of ordinal outcomes with monotone missing data patterns. Through a simulation study and an empirical example, the authors show that the two methods are indeed comparable meaning any of the two may be used when faced with scenarios, at least, as the ones presented here.     

A multiple imputation approach to nonlinear mixed-effects models with covariate measurement errors and missing values

In longitudinal studies, nonlinear mixed-effects models have been widely applied to describe the intra- and the inter-subject variations in data. The inter-subject variation usually receives great attention and it may be partially explained by time-dependent covariates. However, some covariates may be measured with substantial errors and may contain missing values. We proposed a multiple imputation method, implemented by a Markov Chain Monte-Carlo method along with Gibbs sampler, to address the covariate measurement errors and missing data in nonlinear mixed-effects models. The multiple imputation method is illustrated in a real data example. Simulation studies show that the multiple imputation method outperforms the commonly used naive methods.     

Sequential imputation for models with latent variables assuming latent ignorability

Models that involve an outcome variable, covariates, and latent variables are frequently the target for estimation and inference. The presence of missing covariate or outcome data presents a challenge, particularly when missingness depends on the latent variables. This missingness mechanism is called latent ignorable or latent missing at random and is a generalisation of missing at random. Several authors have previously proposed approaches for handling latent ignorable missingness, but these methods rely on prior specification of the joint distribution for the complete data. In practice, specifying the joint distribution can be difficult and/or restrictive. We develop a novel sequential imputation procedure for imputing covariate and outcome data for models with latent variables under latent ignorable missingness. The proposed method does not require a joint model; rather, we use results under a joint model to inform imputation with less restrictive modelling assumptions. We discuss identifiability and convergence‐related issues, and simulation results are presented in several modelling settings. The method is motivated and illustrated by a study of head and neck cancer recurrence. Imputing missing data for models with latent variables under latent‐dependent missingness without specifying a full joint model.     

Missing data: Discussion points from the PSI missing data expert group

The Points to Consider Document on Missing Data was adopted by the Committee of Health and Medicinal Products (CHMP) in December 2001. In September 2007 the CHMP issued a recommendation to review the document, with particular emphasis on summarizing and critically appraising the pattern of drop‐outs, explaining the role and limitations of the ‘last observation carried forward’ method and describing the CHMP's cautionary stance on the use of mixed models. In preparation for the release of the updated guidance document, statisticians in the Pharmaceutical Industry held a one‐day expert group meeting in September 2008. Topics that were debated included minimizing the extent of missing data and understanding the missing data mechanism, defining the principles for handling missing data and understanding the assumptions underlying different analysis methods. A clear message from the meeting was that at present, biostatisticians tend only to react to missing data. Limited pro‐active planning is undertaken when designing clinical trials. Missing data mechanisms for a trial need to be considered during the planning phase and the impact on the objectives assessed. Another area for improvement is in the understanding of the pattern of missing data observed during a trial and thus the missing data mechanism via the plotting of data; for example, use of Kaplan–Meier curves looking at time to withdrawal. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Control‐based imputation for sensitivity analyses in informative censoring for recurrent event data

In clinical trials, missing data commonly arise through nonadherence to the randomized treatment or to study procedure. For trials in which recurrent event endpoints are of interests, conventional analyses using the proportional intensity model or the count model assume that the data are missing at random, which cannot be tested using the observed data alone. Thus, sensitivity analyses are recommended. We implement the control‐based multiple imputation as sensitivity analyses for the recurrent event data. We model the recurrent event using a piecewise exponential proportional intensity model with frailty and sample the parameters from the posterior distribution. We impute the number of events after dropped out and correct the variance estimation using a bootstrap procedure. We apply the method to an application of sitagliptin study.     

Application of an imputation method for variance estimation under pseudo-likelihood when missing data are NMAR

When data are outcome-dependent non response, pseudo-likelihood yields consistent regression coefficients without specifying the missing data mechanism. However, it is onerous to derive parameter estimators including their standard errors from the regression coefficients under pseudo-likelihood (PL). The present study applies an imputation method to compute the asymptotic standard errors of parameter estimators. The proposed method is simpler than Delta method and it showed similar effect size of the standard errors to bootstrapping in simulation and application studies.     

Hybrid pairwise‐likelihood estimation methods for incomplete longitudinal binary data

In longitudinal data, missing observations occur commonly with incomplete responses and covariates. Missing data can have a ‘missing not at random’ mechanism, a non‐monotone missing pattern, and moreover response and covariates can be missing not simultaneously. To avoid complexities in both modelling and computation, a two‐stage estimation method and a pairwise‐likelihood method are proposed. The two‐stage estimation method enjoys simplicities in computation, but incurs more severe efficiency loss. On the other hand, the pairwise approach leads to estimators with better efficiency, but can be cumbersome in computation. In this paper, we develop a compromise method using a hybrid pairwise‐likelihood framework. Our proposed approach has better efficiency than the two‐stage method, but its computational cost is still reasonable compared to the pairwise approach. The performance of the methods is evaluated empirically by means of simulation studies. Our methods are used to analyse longitudinal data obtained from the National Population Health Study.     

Sensitivity to imputation models and assumptions in receiver operating characteristic analysis with incomplete data

Modern statistical methods using incomplete data have been increasingly applied in a wide variety of substantive problems. Similarly, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis, a method used in evaluating diagnostic tests or biomarkers in medical research, has also been increasingly popular problem in both its development and application. While missing-data methods have been applied in ROC analysis, the impact of model mis-specification and/or assumptions (e.g. missing at random) underlying the missing data has not been thoroughly studied. In this work, we study the performance of multiple imputation (MI) inference in ROC analysis. Particularly, we investigate parametric and non-parametric techniques for MI inference under common missingness mechanisms. Depending on the coherency of the imputation model with the underlying data generation mechanism, our results show that MI generally leads to well-calibrated inferences under ignorable missingness mechanisms.     

基于数据缺失率和缺失模式的多重插补误差研究

文章通过多重插补方法对不同缺失率和缺失模式的多变量缺失样本进行插补,研究了多重插补误差与缺失率和缺失模式的依赖关系。结果表明,当缺失率为0~15%时,多重插补误差与缺失率呈线性关系;当缺失率大于15%时,两者呈偏离线性关系。多重插补误差与缺失模式的方差均值比呈正相关性,当方差均值比越大时,误差也越大。     

Efficient inverse probability weighting method for quantile regression with nonignorable missing data

Quantitle regression (QR) is a popular approach to estimate functional relations between variables for all portions of a probability distribution. Parameter estimation in QR with missing data is one of the most challenging issues in statistics. Regression quantiles can be substantially biased when observations are subject to missingness. We study several inverse probability weighting (IPW) estimators for parameters in QR when covariates or responses are subject to missing not at random. Maximum likelihood and semiparametric likelihood methods are employed to estimate the respondent probability function. To achieve nice efficiency properties, we develop an empirical likelihood (EL) approach to QR with the auxiliary information from the calibration constraints. The proposed methods are less sensitive to misspecified missing mechanisms. Asymptotic properties of the proposed IPW estimators are shown under general settings. The efficiency gain of EL-based IPW estimator is quantified theoretically. Simulation studies and a data set on the work limitation of injured workers from Canada are used to illustrated our proposed methodologies.     

Bayesian methods for dealing with missing data problems

Missing data, a common but challenging issue in most studies, may lead to biased and inefficient inferences if handled inappropriately. As a natural and powerful way for dealing with missing data, Bayesian approach has received much attention in the literature. This paper reviews the recent developments and applications of Bayesian methods for dealing with ignorable and non-ignorable missing data. We firstly introduce missing data mechanisms and Bayesian framework for dealing with missing data, and then introduce missing data models under ignorable and non-ignorable missing data circumstances based on the literature. After that, important issues of Bayesian inference, including prior construction, posterior computation, model comparison and sensitivity analysis, are discussed. Finally, several future issues that deserve further research are summarized and concluded.     

Missing data sensitivity analysis for recurrent event data using controlled imputation

Statistical analyses of recurrent event data have typically been based on the missing at random assumption. One implication of this is that, if data are collected only when patients are on their randomized treatment, the resulting de jure estimator of treatment effect corresponds to the situation in which the patients adhere to this regime throughout the study. For confirmatory analysis of clinical trials, sensitivity analyses are required to investigate alternative de facto estimands that depart from this assumption. Recent publications have described the use of multiple imputation methods based on pattern mixture models for continuous outcomes, where imputation for the missing data for one treatment arm (e.g. the active arm) is based on the statistical behaviour of outcomes in another arm (e.g. the placebo arm). This has been referred to as controlled imputation or reference‐based imputation. In this paper, we use the negative multinomial distribution to apply this approach to analyses of recurrent events and other similar outcomes. The methods are illustrated by a trial in severe asthma where the primary endpoint was rate of exacerbations and the primary analysis was based on the negative binomial model. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Comparison of several imputation methods for missing baseline data in propensity scores analysis of binary outcome

We performed a simulation study comparing the statistical properties of the estimated log odds ratio from propensity scores analyses of a binary response variable, in which missing baseline data had been imputed using a simple imputation scheme (Treatment Mean Imputation), compared with three ways of performing multiple imputation (MI) and with a Complete Case analysis. MI that included treatment (treated/untreated) and outcome (for our analyses, outcome was adverse event [yes/no]) in the imputer's model had the best statistical properties of the imputation schemes we studied. MI is feasible to use in situations where one has just a few outcomes to analyze. We also found that Treatment Mean Imputation performed quite well and is a reasonable alternative to MI in situations where it is not feasible to use MI. Treatment Mean Imputation performed better than MI methods that did not include both the treatment and outcome in the imputer's model. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.