Can one assess whether missing data are missing at random in medical studies?

Abstract

For handling missing data, newer methods such as those based on multiple imputation are generally more accurate than older ones and entail weaker assumptions. Yet most do assume that data are missing at random (MAR). The issue of assessing whether the MAR assumption holds to begin with has been largely ignored. In fact, no way to directly test MAR is available. We propose an alternate assumption, MAR+, that can be tested. MAR+ always implies MAR, so inability to reject MAR+ bodes well for MAR. In contrast, MAR implies MAR+ not universally, but under certain conditions that are often plausible; thus, rejection of MAR+ can raise suspicions about MAR. Our approach is applicable mainly to studies that are not longitudinal. We present five illustrative medical examples, in most of which it turns out that MAR+ fails. There are limits to the ability of sophisticated statistical methods to correct for missing data. Efforts to try to prevent missing data in the first place should therefore receive more attention in medical studies than they have heretofore attracted. If MAR+ is found to fail for a study whose data have already been gathered, extra caution may need to be exercised in the interpretation of the results.

Developmental trajectories of body mass index throughout the life course: an application of Latent Class Growth (Mixture) Modelling

“…An important assumption of this algorithm is that the data should be missing at random (MAR). Although this assumption is difficult to test (Pothoff et al 2006), the included participants were compared with the excluded participants on the variables analysed. Regarding BMI at baseline (i.e.…”

The mathematics of causal inference

“…While some recoverability and testability results are known for MCAR and MAR, (Little, 1988;Potthoff et al, 2006) the theory of structural models permits us to extend these results to the entire class of MNAR problems, namely, the class of problems in which at least one missingness mechanism (R z ) is triggered by variables that are themselves victims of missingness (e.g., X and Y in Fig. 4(b)).…”

Semiparametric Estimation with Data Missing Not at Random Using an Instrumental Variable

“…The MAR assumption is strictly not testable in a nonparametric model without an additional assumption (Gill et al, 1997;Potthoff et al, 2006) and is often untenable. An outcome is said to be missing not at random (MNAR) if it is neither MCAR nor MAR, such that conditional on the observed variables, the missingness process depends on the unobserved variables (Little and Rubin, 2002).…”