
In medical research missing data are sometimes inevitable. Different missingness mechanisms can be distinguished: (a) missing completely at random; (b) missing by design; (c) missing at random, and (d) missing not at random. If participants with missing data are excluded from statistical analyses, this can lead to biased study results and loss of statistical power. Imputation methods can be applied to estimate missing values; multiple imputation gives a good idea of the inaccuracy of the reconstructed measurements. The most common imputation methods assume that missing data are missing at random. Multiple imputation contributes greatly to the efficiency and reliability of estimates because maximum use is made of the data collected. Imputation is not meant to obviate low-quality data.
Bias, Research Design, Data Interpretation, Statistical, Humans, Reproducibility of Results
Bias, Research Design, Data Interpretation, Statistical, Humans, Reproducibility of Results
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
