Asset Details
MbrlCatalogueTitleDetail
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Sensitivity analysis after multiple imputation under missing at random: a weighting approach
by
Kenward, Michael G.
, White, Ian R.
, Carpenter, James R.
in
Alternative approaches
/ Analysis
/ Bias
/ Biomedical Research - statistics & numerical data
/ Data analysis
/ Data quality
/ Dropping out
/ Missing data
/ Models, Statistical
/ Multiple imputation
/ Peer review
/ Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic - statistics & numerical data
/ Sensitivity analysis
/ Sensitivity and Specificity
/ Simulation
/ Statistical analysis
/ United Kingdom
/ Weighting
2007
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
You are currently in the queue to collect this book. You will be notified once it is your turn to collect the book.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Sensitivity analysis after multiple imputation under missing at random: a weighting approach
by
Kenward, Michael G.
, White, Ian R.
, Carpenter, James R.
in
Alternative approaches
/ Analysis
/ Bias
/ Biomedical Research - statistics & numerical data
/ Data analysis
/ Data quality
/ Dropping out
/ Missing data
/ Models, Statistical
/ Multiple imputation
/ Peer review
/ Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic - statistics & numerical data
/ Sensitivity analysis
/ Sensitivity and Specificity
/ Simulation
/ Statistical analysis
/ United Kingdom
/ Weighting
2007
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Do you wish to request the book?
Sensitivity analysis after multiple imputation under missing at random: a weighting approach
by
Kenward, Michael G.
, White, Ian R.
, Carpenter, James R.
in
Alternative approaches
/ Analysis
/ Bias
/ Biomedical Research - statistics & numerical data
/ Data analysis
/ Data quality
/ Dropping out
/ Missing data
/ Models, Statistical
/ Multiple imputation
/ Peer review
/ Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic - statistics & numerical data
/ Sensitivity analysis
/ Sensitivity and Specificity
/ Simulation
/ Statistical analysis
/ United Kingdom
/ Weighting
2007
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Sensitivity analysis after multiple imputation under missing at random: a weighting approach
Journal Article
Sensitivity analysis after multiple imputation under missing at random: a weighting approach
2007
Request Book From Autostore
and Choose the Collection Method
Overview
Multiple imputation (MI) is now well established as a flexible, general, method for the analysis of data sets with missing values. Most implementations assume the missing data are `missing at random' (MAR), that is, given the observed data, the reason for the missing data does not depend on the unseen data. However, although this is a helpful and simplifying working assumption, it is unlikely to be true in practice. Assessing the sensitivity of the analysis to the MAR assumption is therefore important. However, there is very limited MI software for this. Further, analysis of a data set with missing values that are not missing at random (NMAR) is complicated by the need to extend the MAR imputation model to include a model for the reason for dropout. Here, we propose a simple alternative. We first impute under MAR and obtain parameter estimates for each imputed data set. The overall NMAR parameter estimate is a weighted average of these parameter estimates, where the weights depend on the assumed degree of departure from MAR. In some settings, this approach gives results that closely agree with joint modelling as the number of imputations increases. In others, it provides ball-park estimates of the results of full NMAR modelling, indicating the extent to which it is necessary and providing a check on its results. We illustrate our approach with a small simulation study, and the analysis of data from a trial of interventions to improve the quality of peer review.
Publisher
SAGE Publications,Sage Publications Ltd
MBRLCatalogueRelatedBooks
Related Items
Related Items
This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website.