multilevel multiple imputation
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

11
(FIVE YEARS 4)

H-INDEX

4
(FIVE YEARS 0)

2020 ◽  
pp. jech-2019-213412
Author(s):  
Nicolas Berger ◽  
Daniel Lewis ◽  
Matteo Quartagno ◽  
Edmund Njeru Njagi ◽  
Steven Cummins

BackgroundMost UK adolescents do not achieve recommended levels of physical activity (PA). Previous studies suggest that the social environment could contribute to inequalities in PA behaviours, but longitudinal evidence is limited. We examined whether neighbourhood trust and social support were longitudinally associated with four common forms of PA: walking to school, walking for leisure, outdoor PA and pay and play PA. We further assessed whether gender moderated these associations.MethodsWe used longitudinal data from the Olympic Regeneration in East London (ORiEL) study. In 2012, 3106 adolescents aged 11–12 were enrolled from 25 schools in four deprived boroughs of East London, UK. Adolescents were followed-up in 2013 and 2014. The final sample includes 2664 participants interviewed at waves 2 and 3. We estimated logistic regression models using generalised estimating equations (GEEs) (pooled models) and proportional odds models (models of change) to assess associations between the social environment exposures and the PA outcomes, adjusting for potential confounders. Item non-response was handled using multilevel multiple imputation.ResultsWe found that different aspects of the social environment predict different types of PA. Neighbourhood trust was positively associated with leisure-type PA. Social support from friends and family was positively associated with walking for leisure. There was some evidence that changes in exposures led to changes in the PA outcomes. Associations did not systematically differ by gender.ConclusionThese results confirm the importance of the social environment to predict PA and its change over time in a deprived and ethnically diverse adolescent population.


2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (5) ◽  
pp. 1338-1353
Author(s):  
Elizabeth L Turner ◽  
Lanqiu Yao ◽  
Fan Li ◽  
Melanie Prague

The generalized estimating equation (GEE) approach can be used to analyze cluster randomized trial data to obtain population-averaged intervention effects. However, most cluster randomized trials have some missing outcome data and a GEE analysis of available data may be biased when outcome data are not missing completely at random. Although multilevel multiple imputation for GEE (MMI-GEE) has been widely used, alternative approaches such as weighted GEE are less common in practice. Using both simulations and a real data example, we evaluate the performance of inverse probability weighted GEE vs. MMI-GEE for binary outcomes. Simulated data are generated assuming a covariate-dependent missing data pattern across a range of missingness clustering (from none to high), where all covariates are measured at baseline and are fully observed (i.e. a type of missing-at-random mechanism). Two types of weights are estimated and used in the weighted GEE: (1) assuming no clustering of missingness (W-GEE) and (2) accounting for such clustering (CW-GEE). Results show that, even in settings with high missingness clustering, CW-GEE can lead to more bias and lower coverage than W-GEE, whereas W-GEE and MMI-GEE provide comparable results. W-GEE should be considered a viable strategy to account for missing outcomes in cluster randomized trials.


2019 ◽  
Vol 44 (5) ◽  
pp. 625-641
Author(s):  
Timothy Hayes

Multiple imputation is a popular method for addressing data that are presumed to be missing at random. To obtain accurate results, one’s imputation model must be congenial to (appropriate for) one’s intended analysis model. This article reviews and demonstrates two recent software packages, Blimp and jomo, to multiply impute data in a manner congenial with three prototypical multilevel modeling analyses: (1) a random intercept model, (2) a random slope model, and (3) a cross-level interaction model. Following these analysis examples, I review and discuss both software packages.


2016 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 222-240 ◽  
Author(s):  
Craig K. Enders ◽  
Stephen A. Mistler ◽  
Brian T. Keller

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document