Paper detail

Correcting for non-ignorable missingness in smoking trends

Data missing not at random (MNAR) is a major challenge in survey sampling. We propose an approach based on registry data to deal with non-ignorable missingness in health examination surveys. The approach relies on follow-up data available from administrative registers several years after the survey. For illustration we use data on smoking prevalence in Finnish National FINRISK study conducted in 1972-1997. The data consist of measured survey information including missingness indicators, register-based background information and register-based time-to-disease survival data. The parameters of missingness mechanism are estimable with these data although the original survey data are MNAR. The underlying data generation process is modelled by a Bayesian model. The results indicate that the estimated smoking prevalence rates in Finland may be significantly affected by missing data.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 authors2 topics

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 map preview

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.