IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jorssa/v169y2006i3p571-584.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A comparison of multiple imputation and doubly robust estimation for analyses with missing data

Author

Listed:
  • James R. Carpenter
  • Michael G. Kenward
  • Stijn Vansteelandt

Abstract

Summary. Multiple imputation is now a well‐established technique for analysing data sets where some units have incomplete observations. Provided that the imputation model is correct, the resulting estimates are consistent. An alternative, weighting by the inverse probability of observing complete data on a unit, is conceptually simple and involves fewer modelling assumptions, but it is known to be both inefficient (relative to a fully parametric approach) and sensitive to the choice of weighting model. Over the last decade, there has been a considerable body of theoretical work to improve the performance of inverse probability weighting, leading to the development of ‘doubly robust’ or ‘doubly protected’ estimators. We present an intuitive review of these developments and contrast these estimators with multiple imputation from both a theoretical and a practical viewpoint.

Suggested Citation

  • James R. Carpenter & Michael G. Kenward & Stijn Vansteelandt, 2006. "A comparison of multiple imputation and doubly robust estimation for analyses with missing data," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 169(3), pages 571-584, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:jorssa:v:169:y:2006:i:3:p:571-584
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-985X.2006.00407.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-985X.2006.00407.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1467-985X.2006.00407.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David Clayton & David Spiegelhalter & Graham Dunn & Andrew Pickles, 1998. "Analysis of longitudinal binary data from multiphase sampling," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 60(1), pages 71-87.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. repec:jss:jstsof:43:i13 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Lois G. Kim & Simon G. Thompson, 2011. "Estimation of life‐years gained and cost effectiveness based on cause‐specific mortality," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(7), pages 842-852, July.
    3. Shen-Ming Lee & T. Martin Lukusa & Chin-Shang Li, 2020. "Estimation of a zero-inflated Poisson regression model with missing covariates via nonparametric multiple imputation methods," Computational Statistics, Springer, vol. 35(2), pages 725-754, June.
    4. Richard M. Golden & Steven S. Henley & Halbert White & T. Michael Kashner, 2019. "Consequences of Model Misspecification for Maximum Likelihood Estimation with Missing Data," Econometrics, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-27, September.
    5. Sophia Rabe-Hesketh & Anders Skrondal, 2007. "Multilevel and Latent Variable Modeling with Composite Links and Exploded Likelihoods," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 72(2), pages 123-140, June.
    6. Rubin Daniel B & van der Laan Mark J., 2008. "Empirical Efficiency Maximization: Improved Locally Efficient Covariate Adjustment in Randomized Experiments and Survival Analysis," The International Journal of Biostatistics, De Gruyter, vol. 4(1), pages 1-42, May.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:jorssa:v:169:y:2006:i:3:p:571-584. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rssssea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.