首页> 外文期刊>Open Journal of Statistics >Comparative Study of Four Methods in Missing Value Imputations under Missing Completely at Random Mechanism
【24h】

Comparative Study of Four Methods in Missing Value Imputations under Missing Completely at Random Mechanism

机译:随机机制完全缺失下四种缺失值估算方法的比较研究

获取原文
       

摘要

In analyzing data from clinical trials and longitudinal studies, the issue of missing values is always a fundamental challenge since the missing data could introduce bias and lead to erroneous statistical inferences. To deal with this challenge, several imputation methods have been developed in the literature to handle missing values where the most commonly used are complete case method, mean imputation method, last observation carried forward (LOCF) method, and multiple imputation (MI) method. In this paper, we conduct a simulation study to investigate the efficiency of these four typical imputation methods with longitudinal data setting under missing completely at random (MCAR). We categorize missingness with three cases from a lower percentage of 5% to a higher percentage of 30% and 50% missingness. With this simulation study, we make a conclusion that LOCF method has more bias than the other three methods in most situations. MI method has the least bias with the best coverage probability. Thus, we conclude that MI method is the most effective imputation method in our MCAR simulation study.
机译:在分析来自临床试验和纵向研究的数据时,缺失值的问题始终是一个根本性的挑战,因为缺失的数据可能会引入偏差并导致错误的统计推断。为了应对这一挑战,文献中已经开发了几种插补方法来处理缺失值,其中最常用的是完整案例方法,均值插补方法,最后观察结转(LOCF)方法和多重插补(MI)方法。在本文中,我们进行了一个仿真研究,以研究在纵向数据设置下完全随机丢失(MCAR)情况下这四种典型插补方法的效率。我们将缺失分为三类,从较低的5%到较高的30%和50%。通过此仿真研究,我们得出结论,在大多数情况下,LOCF方法比其他三种方法具有更大的偏差。 MI方法的偏差最小,覆盖率最高。因此,我们得出结论,在我们的MCAR仿真研究中,MI方法是最有效的归因方法。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号