A Unified Approach to Measurement Error and Missing Data: Overview and Applications

Abstract

Although social scientists devote considerable effort to mitigating measurement error during data collection, they often ignore the issue during data analysis. And although many statistical methods have been proposed for reducing measurement error-induced biases, few have been widely used because of implausible assumptions, high levels of model dependence, difficult computation, or inapplicability with multiple mismeasured variables. We develop an easy-to-use alternative without these problems; it generalizes the popular multiple imputation (MI) framework by treating missing data problems as a limiting special case of extreme measurement error and corrects for both. Like MI, the proposed framework is a simple two-step procedure, so that in the second step researchers can use whatever statistical method they would have if there had been no problem in the first place. We also offer empirical illustrations, open source software that implements all the methods described herein, and a companion article with technical details and extensions.

Using Sensitivity Analyses for Unobserved Confounding to Address Covariate Measurement Error in Propensity Score Methods

“…There exist numerous other approaches for addressing covariate measurement error that may perform better and rely on fewer assumptions (4-6, 12, 26-34). However, with few exceptions (12), many of these approaches are not as easy to implement for nonstatisticians. Comparing performance among these other approaches and lowering barriers to implementation are areas for future work.…”

Some suggestions on dealing with measurement error in linkage analyses

“…Multiple overimputation is an attractive alternative to estimation-based error-correction approaches (Blackwell, Honaker, & King, 2015a, 2015b. Multiple overimputation extends the idea of multiple imputation of missing values to the mitigation of measurement error.…”

Global, regional, and national comparative risk assessment of 79 behavioural, environmental and occupational, and metabolic risks or clusters of risks in 188 countries, 1990–2013: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2013

“…63 However, the direction of bias in settings with measurement error in multiple independent variables is unknown in the presence of correlation between diff erent variables. 64,65 At the population level, single 24 h recall has been used in many nutrition surveys. 24 h recall probably underestimates, as shown in doubly labelled water 66 and urinary sodium studies.…”