IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/somere/v53y2024i3p1105-1135.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Comparison of Three Popular Methods for Handling Missing Data: Complete-Case Analysis, Inverse Probability Weighting, and Multiple Imputation

Author

Listed:
  • Roderick J. Little
  • James R. Carpenter
  • Katherine J. Lee

Abstract

Missing data are a pervasive problem in data analysis. Three common methods for addressing the problem are (a) complete-case analysis, where only units that are complete on the variables in an analysis are included; (b) weighting, where the complete cases are weighted by the inverse of an estimate of the probability of being complete; and (c) multiple imputation (MI), where missing values of the variables in the analysis are imputed as draws from their predictive distribution under an implicit or explicit statistical model, the imputation process is repeated to create multiple filled-in data sets, and analysis is carried out using simple MI combining rules. This article provides a non-technical discussion of the strengths and weakness of these approaches, and when each of the methods might be adopted over the others. The methods are illustrated on data from the Youth Cohort (Time) Series (YCS) for England, Wales and Scotland, 1984–2002.

Suggested Citation

  • Roderick J. Little & James R. Carpenter & Katherine J. Lee, 2024. "A Comparison of Three Popular Methods for Handling Missing Data: Complete-Case Analysis, Inverse Probability Weighting, and Multiple Imputation," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 53(3), pages 1105-1135, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:somere:v:53:y:2024:i:3:p:1105-1135
    DOI: 10.1177/00491241221113873
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/00491241221113873
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/00491241221113873?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
    ---><---

    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:sae:somere:v:53:y:2024:i:3:p:1105-1135. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.