• J Eval Clin Pract · Feb 2021

    Missing data in longitudinal studies: Comparison of multiple imputation methods in a real clinical setting.

    • Rosalba Rosato, Eva Pagano, Silvia Testa, Paolo Zola, and Daniela di Cuonzo.
    • Department of Psychology, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
    • J Eval Clin Pract. 2021 Feb 1; 27 (1): 34-41.

    Rationale, Aims, And ObjectivesMissing data represent a challenge in longitudinal studies. The aim of the study is to compare the performance of the multivariate normal imputation and the fully conditional specification methods, using real data set with missing data partially completed 2 years later.MethodThe data used came from an ongoing randomized controlled trial with 5-year follow-up. At a certain time, we observed a number of patients with missing data and a number of patients whose data were unobserved because they were not yet eligible for a given follow-up. Both unobserved and missing data were imputed. The imputed unobserved data were compared with the corresponding real information obtained 2 years later.ResultsBoth imputation methods showed similar performance on the accuracy measures and produced minimally biased estimates.ConclusionDespite the large number of repeated measures with intermittent missing data and the non-normal multivariate distribution of data, both methods performed well and was not possible to determine which was better.© 2020 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.