Literature DB >> 28407203

On the multiple imputation variance estimator for control-based and delta-adjusted pattern mixture models.

Yongqiang Tang1.   

Abstract

Control-based pattern mixture models (PMM) and delta-adjusted PMMs are commonly used as sensitivity analyses in clinical trials with non-ignorable dropout. These PMMs assume that the statistical behavior of outcomes varies by pattern in the experimental arm in the imputation procedure, but the imputed data are typically analyzed by a standard method such as the primary analysis model. In the multiple imputation (MI) inference, Rubin's variance estimator is generally biased when the imputation and analysis models are uncongenial. One objective of the article is to quantify the bias of Rubin's variance estimator in the control-based and delta-adjusted PMMs for longitudinal continuous outcomes. These PMMs assume the same observed data distribution as the mixed effects model for repeated measures (MMRM). We derive analytic expressions for the MI treatment effect estimator and the associated Rubin's variance in these PMMs and MMRM as functions of the maximum likelihood estimator from the MMRM analysis and the observed proportion of subjects in each dropout pattern when the number of imputations is infinite. The asymptotic bias is generally small or negligible in the delta-adjusted PMM, but can be sizable in the control-based PMM. This indicates that the inference based on Rubin's rule is approximately valid in the delta-adjusted PMM. A simple variance estimator is proposed to ensure asymptotically valid MI inferences in these PMMs, and compared with the bootstrap variance. The proposed method is illustrated by the analysis of an antidepressant trial, and its performance is further evaluated via a simulation study.
© 2017, The International Biometric Society.

Keywords:  Control-based pattern mixture model; Delta-adjusted imputation; Missing not at random; Mixed effects model for repeated measures; Rubin's variance estimator; Uncongeniality

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28407203     DOI: 10.1111/biom.12702

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biometrics        ISSN: 0006-341X            Impact factor:   2.571


  6 in total

1.  ROBUST INFERENCE WHEN COMBINING INVERSE-PROBABILITY WEIGHTING AND MULTIPLE IMPUTATION TO ADDRESS MISSING DATA WITH APPLICATION TO AN ELECTRONIC HEALTH RECORDS-BASED STUDY OF BARIATRIC SURGERY.

Authors:  Tanayott Thaweethai; David E Arterburn; Karen J Coleman; Sebastien Haneuse
Journal:  Ann Appl Stat       Date:  2021-03       Impact factor: 1.959

2.  Information-anchored sensitivity analysis: theory and application.

Authors:  Suzie Cro; James R Carpenter; Michael G Kenward
Journal:  J R Stat Soc Ser A Stat Soc       Date:  2018-11-16       Impact factor: 2.483

3.  Bootstrap inference for multiple imputation under uncongeniality and misspecification.

Authors:  Jonathan W Bartlett; Rachael A Hughes
Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res       Date:  2020-06-30       Impact factor: 3.021

Review 4.  A review of the use of controlled multiple imputation in randomised controlled trials with missing outcome data.

Authors:  Ping-Tee Tan; Suzie Cro; Eleanor Van Vogt; Matyas Szigeti; Victoria R Cornelius
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2021-04-15       Impact factor: 4.615

5.  Sensitivity to missing not at random dropout in clinical trials: Use and interpretation of the trimmed means estimator.

Authors:  Audinga-Dea Hazewinkel; Jack Bowden; Kaitlin H Wade; Tom Palmer; Nicola J Wiles; Kate Tilling
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2022-01-31       Impact factor: 2.497

6.  Handling missing data in modelling quality of clinician-prescribed routine care: Sensitivity analysis of departure from missing at random assumption.

Authors:  Susan Gachau; Matteo Quartagno; Edmund Njeru Njagi; Nelson Owuor; Mike English; Philip Ayieko
Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res       Date:  2020-05-11       Impact factor: 3.021

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.