Paper detail

Accounting for not-at-random missingness through imputation stacking

Not-at-random missingness presents a challenge in addressing missing data in many health research applications. In this paper, we propose a new approach to account for not-at-random missingness after multiple imputation through weighted analysis of stacked multiple imputations. The weights are easily calculated as a function of the imputed data and assumptions about the not-at-random missingness. We demonstrate through simulation that the proposed method has excellent performance when the missingness model is correctly specified. In practice, the missingness mechanism will not be known. We show how we can use our approach in a sensitivity analysis framework to evaluate the robustness of model inference to different assumptions about the missingness mechanism, and we provide R package StackImpute to facilitate implementation as part of routine sensitivity analyses. We apply the proposed method to account for not-at-random missingness in human papillomavirus test results in a study of survival for patients diagnosed with oropharyngeal cancer.

preprint2021arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.