Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Medical Research Methodology 1/2017

Open Access 01-12-2017 | Research article

Outcome-sensitive multiple imputation: a simulation study

Authors: Evangelos Kontopantelis, Ian R. White, Matthew Sperrin, Iain Buchan

Published in: BMC Medical Research Methodology | Issue 1/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Multiple imputation is frequently used to deal with missing data in healthcare research. Although it is known that the outcome should be included in the imputation model when imputing missing covariate values, it is not known whether it should be imputed. Similarly no clear recommendations exist on: the utility of incorporating a secondary outcome, if available, in the imputation model; the level of protection offered when data are missing not-at-random; the implications of the dataset size and missingness levels.

Methods

We used realistic assumptions to generate thousands of datasets across a broad spectrum of contexts: three mechanisms of missingness (completely at random; at random; not at random); varying extents of missingness (20–80% missing data); and different sample sizes (1,000 or 10,000 cases). For each context we quantified the performance of a complete case analysis and seven multiple imputation methods which deleted cases with missing outcome before imputation, after imputation or not at all; included or did not include the outcome in the imputation models; and included or did not include a secondary outcome in the imputation models. Methods were compared on mean absolute error, bias, coverage and power over 1,000 datasets for each scenario.

Results

Overall, there was very little to separate multiple imputation methods which included the outcome in the imputation model. Even when missingness was quite extensive, all multiple imputation approaches performed well. Incorporating a secondary outcome, moderately correlated with the outcome of interest, made very little difference. The dataset size and the extent of missingness affected performance, as expected. Multiple imputation methods protected less well against missingness not at random, but did offer some protection.

Conclusions

As long as the outcome is included in the imputation model, there are very small performance differences between the possible multiple imputation approaches: no outcome imputation, imputation or imputation and deletion. All informative covariates, even with very high levels of missingness, should be included in the multiple imputation model. Multiple imputation offers some protection against a simple missing not at random mechanism.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
2.
go back to reference Rubin DB. Multiple imputation for nonresponse in surveys. New York: Wiley; 1987.CrossRef Rubin DB. Multiple imputation for nonresponse in surveys. New York: Wiley; 1987.CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Rogelberg SG, Luong A, Sederburg ME, Cristol DS. Employee attitude surveys: examining the attitudes of noncompliant employees. J Appl Psychol. 2000;85(2):284–93.CrossRefPubMed Rogelberg SG, Luong A, Sederburg ME, Cristol DS. Employee attitude surveys: examining the attitudes of noncompliant employees. J Appl Psychol. 2000;85(2):284–93.CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Rubin DB. Multiple imputation after 18+ years. J Am Stat Assoc. 1996;91(434):473–89.CrossRef Rubin DB. Multiple imputation after 18+ years. J Am Stat Assoc. 1996;91(434):473–89.CrossRef
10.
13.
15.
go back to reference StataCorp LP. Stata Statistical software for Windows. 141st ed. 2015. StataCorp LP. Stata Statistical software for Windows. 141st ed. 2015.
17.
18.
go back to reference Sullivan TR, Salter AB, Ryan P, Lee KJ. Bias and Precision of the “Multiple Imputation, Then Deletion” Method for Dealing With Missing Outcome Data. Am J Epidemiol. 2015;182(6):528–34. doi:10.1093/aje/kwv100.CrossRefPubMed Sullivan TR, Salter AB, Ryan P, Lee KJ. Bias and Precision of the “Multiple Imputation, Then Deletion” Method for Dealing With Missing Outcome Data. Am J Epidemiol. 2015;182(6):528–34. doi:10.​1093/​aje/​kwv100.CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Kontopantelis E, Springate D, Parisi R, Reeves D. Simulation-based power calculations for mixed effects modelling: ipdpower in Stata. J Stat Softw. 2016;1380:22. Kontopantelis E, Springate D, Parisi R, Reeves D. Simulation-based power calculations for mixed effects modelling: ipdpower in Stata. J Stat Softw. 2016;1380:22.
Metadata
Title
Outcome-sensitive multiple imputation: a simulation study
Authors
Evangelos Kontopantelis
Ian R. White
Matthew Sperrin
Iain Buchan
Publication date
01-12-2017
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Medical Research Methodology / Issue 1/2017
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2288
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-016-0281-5

Other articles of this Issue 1/2017

BMC Medical Research Methodology 1/2017 Go to the issue