2002
DOI: 10.1037/1082-989x.7.2.147
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Missing data: Our view of the state of the art.

Abstract: Statistical procedures for missing data have vastly improved, yet misconception and unsound practice still abound. The authors frame the missing-data problem, review methods, offer advice, and raise issues that remain unresolved. They clear up common misunderstandings regarding the missing at random (MAR) concept. They summarize the evidence against older procedures and, with few exceptions, discourage their use. They present, in both technical and practical language, 2 general approaches that come highly reco… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

44
7,570
5
112

Year Published

2005
2005
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9,460 publications
(7,877 citation statements)
references
References 87 publications
44
7,570
5
112
Order By: Relevance
“…All estimates remained within the limits for unproblematic estimates [27] of ± 0.5 SE from the true value with up to 50% missingness. Only the regression coefficient estimates for stage, pre-operative RT, post-operative RT and indication for CT (Figure 1) could be deemed problematic [27] with 75% missingness. However, the percentage biases were more extreme than the specified accuracy given the number of replications performed for the majority of covariates with 25% or more missingness (Figure 2).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 64%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…All estimates remained within the limits for unproblematic estimates [27] of ± 0.5 SE from the true value with up to 50% missingness. Only the regression coefficient estimates for stage, pre-operative RT, post-operative RT and indication for CT (Figure 1) could be deemed problematic [27] with 75% missingness. However, the percentage biases were more extreme than the specified accuracy given the number of replications performed for the majority of covariates with 25% or more missingness (Figure 2).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 64%
“…The regression coefficient estimates were compared against the "true" values in terms of their bias, coverage and efficiency [27]. The average regression coefficient estimates and associated empirical SE obtained from performing 20000 replications of 1000 cases with complete data were considered as the "true" values.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In our sample, 86 (8.1%) were missing one PCL-5 item, 25 (2.4%) were missing two or three PCL-5 items, 201 (18.9%) were missing one SF-36 item, and 90 (8.5%) were missing two to six SF-36 items. Missing data on the PCL-5 and SF-36 were estimated using maximum likelihood (ML) procedures (Schafer & Graham, 2002). Two structural equation models (SEM) were constructed to examine associations between PTSD symptom dimensions and physical/psychosocial HRQoL  (see Supplementary Figures 1 and 2).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition, listwise deletion produces unbiased estimates only under the assumption that the missing data occur completely at random, which is not realistic in many cases (Enders, 2006). Accordingly, as noted in the main text, we applied the full information maximum likelihood method (FIML; see Schafer & Graham, 2002). This approach uses the likelihood function, which considers individual patterns of missing data, and which has the important advantage of rendering results that make use of the full information from the entire sample.…”
Section: Missing Datamentioning
confidence: 99%