Paper detail

Identifying Treatment Effects using Trimmed Means when Data are Missing Not at Random

Patients often discontinue treatment in a clinical trial because their health condition is not improving. Consequently, the patients still in the study at the end of the trial have better health outcomes on average than the initial patient population would have had if every patient had completed the trial. If we only analyze the patients who complete the trial, then this missing data problem biases the estimator of a medication's efficacy because study outcomes are missing not at random (MNAR). One way to overcome this problem - the trimmed means approach for missing data - sets missing values as slightly worse than the worst observed outcome and then trims away a fraction of the distribution from each treatment arm before calculating differences in treatment efficacy (Permutt 2017, Pharmaceutical statistics 16.1:20-28). In this paper we derive sufficient and necessary conditions for when this approach can identify the average population treatment effect in the presence of MNAR data. Numerical studies show the trimmed means approach's ability to effectively estimate treatment efficacy when data are MNAR and missingness is strongly associated with an unfavorable outcome, but trimmed means fail when data are missing at random (MAR) when the better approach would be to multiply impute the missing values. If the reasons for discontinuation in a clinical trial are known analysts can improve estimates with a combination of multiple imputation (MI) and the trimmed means approach when the assumptions of each missing data mechanism hold. When the assumptions are justifiable, using trimmed means can help identify treatment effects notwithstanding MNAR data.

preprint2019arXivOpen 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.