Missing Completely at Random

2021 ◽  
pp. 3240-3240
2013 ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
C. SIORDIA

Background:Item allocation (the assignment of plausible values to missing or illogical responses insurvey studies) is at times necessary in the production of complete data sets. In the American Community Survey(ACS), missing responses to health insurance coverage questions are allocated. Objectives:Because allocationrates may vary as a function of compositional characteristics, this project investigates how seven different healthinsurance coverage items vary in their degree of allocation along basic demographic variables. Methods: Datafrom the ACS 2010 1-year Public Use Microdata Sample file are used in a logistic regression model and tocalculate allocations rates. Results:The findings reveal that: males; people aged 65 and older; those who speakEnglish “very well” or “well”; US citizens; those out-of-poverty; and all racial/ethnic minority groups havehigher odds of experiencing a health insurance item allocation relative to their counterparts. Conclusions: Sincehealth insurance coverage allocations vary by demographic characteristics, further research is needed toinvestigate their mechanisms of missingness and how these may have implications for frailty related research.


Author(s):  
Roderick J. Little

I review assumptions about the missing-data mechanism that underlie methods for the statistical analysis of data with missing values. I describe Rubin's original definition of missing at random, (MAR), its motivation and criticisms, and his sufficient conditions for ignoring the missingness mechanism for likelihood-based, Bayesian, and frequentist inference. Related definitions, including missing completely at random, always MAR, always missing completely at random, and partially MAR are also covered. I present a formal argument for weakening Rubin's sufficient conditions for frequentist maximum likelihood inference with precision based on the observed information. Some simple examples of MAR are described, together with an example where the missingness mechanism can be ignored even though MAR does not hold. Alternative approaches to statistical inference based on the likelihood function are reviewed, along with non-likelihood frequentist approaches, including weighted generalized estimating equations. Connections with the causal inference literature are also discussed. Finally, alternatives to Rubin's MAR definition are discussed, including informative missingness, informative censoring, and coarsening at random. The intent is to provide a relatively nontechnical discussion, although some of the underlying issues are challenging and touch on fundamental questions of statistical inference. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Statistics, Volume 8 is March 7, 2021. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.


2020 ◽  
Vol 49 (5) ◽  
pp. 1702-1711 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charlie Rioux ◽  
Antoine Lewin ◽  
Omolola A Odejimi ◽  
Todd D Little

Abstract Taking advantage of the ability of modern missing data treatments in epidemiological research (e.g. multiple imputation) to recover power while avoiding bias in the presence of data that is missing completely at random, planned missing data designs allow researchers to deliberately incorporate missing data into a research design. A planned missing data design may be done by randomly assigning participants to have missing items in a questionnaire (multiform design) or missing occasions of measurement in a longitudinal study (wave-missing design), or by administering an expensive gold-standard measure to a random subset of participants while the whole sample is administered a cheaper measure (two-method design). Although not common in epidemiology, these designs have been recommended for decades by methodologists for their benefits—notably that data collection costs are minimized and participant burden is reduced, which can increase validity. This paper describes the multiform, wave-missing and two-method designs, including their benefits, their impact on bias and power, and other factors that must be taken into consideration when implementing them in an epidemiological study design.


1996 ◽  
Vol 50 (3) ◽  
pp. 207 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel F. Heitjan ◽  
Srabashi Basu

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document