How handling missing data may impact conclusions: A comparison of six different imputation methods for categorical questionnaire data

Objectives: Missing data is a recurrent issue in many fields of medical research, particularly in questionnaires. The aim of this article is to describe and compare six conceptually different multiple imputation methods, alongside the commonly used complete case analysis, and to explore whether the...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Marianne Riksheim Stavseth, Thomas Clausen, Jo Røislien
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: SAGE Publishing 2019-01-01
Series:SAGE Open Medicine
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1177/2050312118822912
id doaj-3c5221fcc6cb490c90ce934c137944af
record_format Article
spelling doaj-3c5221fcc6cb490c90ce934c137944af2020-11-25T03:40:31ZengSAGE PublishingSAGE Open Medicine2050-31212019-01-01710.1177/2050312118822912How handling missing data may impact conclusions: A comparison of six different imputation methods for categorical questionnaire dataMarianne Riksheim Stavseth0Thomas Clausen1Jo Røislien2Norwegian Centre for Addiction Research, Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, NorwayNorwegian Centre for Addiction Research, Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, NorwayFaculty of Health Sciences, University of Stavanger, Stavanger, NorwayObjectives: Missing data is a recurrent issue in many fields of medical research, particularly in questionnaires. The aim of this article is to describe and compare six conceptually different multiple imputation methods, alongside the commonly used complete case analysis, and to explore whether the choice of methodology for handling missing data might impact clinical conclusions drawn from a regression model when data are categorical. Methods: In addition to the commonly used complete case analysis, we tested the following six imputation methods: multiple imputation using expectation–maximization with bootstrapping, multiple imputation using multiple correspondence analysis, multiple imputation using latent class analysis, multiple hot deck imputation and multivariate imputation by chained equations with two different model specifications: logistic regression and random forests. The methods are tested on real data from a questionnaire-based study in the Norwegian opioid maintenance treatment programme. Results: All methods performed relatively well when the sample size was large (n = 1000). For a smaller sample size (n = 200), the regression estimates depend heavily on the level of missing. When the amount of missing was ⩾20%, in particular, complete case analysis, hot deck and random forests had biased estimates with too low coverage. Multiple imputation using multiple correspondence analysis had the best performance all over. Conclusion: The choice of missing handling methodology has a significant impact on the clinical interpretation of the accompanying statistical analyses. With missing data, the choice of whether to impute or not, and choice of imputation method, can influence clinical conclusion drawn from a regression model and should therefore be given sufficient consideration.https://doi.org/10.1177/2050312118822912
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Marianne Riksheim Stavseth
Thomas Clausen
Jo Røislien
spellingShingle Marianne Riksheim Stavseth
Thomas Clausen
Jo Røislien
How handling missing data may impact conclusions: A comparison of six different imputation methods for categorical questionnaire data
SAGE Open Medicine
author_facet Marianne Riksheim Stavseth
Thomas Clausen
Jo Røislien
author_sort Marianne Riksheim Stavseth
title How handling missing data may impact conclusions: A comparison of six different imputation methods for categorical questionnaire data
title_short How handling missing data may impact conclusions: A comparison of six different imputation methods for categorical questionnaire data
title_full How handling missing data may impact conclusions: A comparison of six different imputation methods for categorical questionnaire data
title_fullStr How handling missing data may impact conclusions: A comparison of six different imputation methods for categorical questionnaire data
title_full_unstemmed How handling missing data may impact conclusions: A comparison of six different imputation methods for categorical questionnaire data
title_sort how handling missing data may impact conclusions: a comparison of six different imputation methods for categorical questionnaire data
publisher SAGE Publishing
series SAGE Open Medicine
issn 2050-3121
publishDate 2019-01-01
description Objectives: Missing data is a recurrent issue in many fields of medical research, particularly in questionnaires. The aim of this article is to describe and compare six conceptually different multiple imputation methods, alongside the commonly used complete case analysis, and to explore whether the choice of methodology for handling missing data might impact clinical conclusions drawn from a regression model when data are categorical. Methods: In addition to the commonly used complete case analysis, we tested the following six imputation methods: multiple imputation using expectation–maximization with bootstrapping, multiple imputation using multiple correspondence analysis, multiple imputation using latent class analysis, multiple hot deck imputation and multivariate imputation by chained equations with two different model specifications: logistic regression and random forests. The methods are tested on real data from a questionnaire-based study in the Norwegian opioid maintenance treatment programme. Results: All methods performed relatively well when the sample size was large (n = 1000). For a smaller sample size (n = 200), the regression estimates depend heavily on the level of missing. When the amount of missing was ⩾20%, in particular, complete case analysis, hot deck and random forests had biased estimates with too low coverage. Multiple imputation using multiple correspondence analysis had the best performance all over. Conclusion: The choice of missing handling methodology has a significant impact on the clinical interpretation of the accompanying statistical analyses. With missing data, the choice of whether to impute or not, and choice of imputation method, can influence clinical conclusion drawn from a regression model and should therefore be given sufficient consideration.
url https://doi.org/10.1177/2050312118822912
work_keys_str_mv AT marianneriksheimstavseth howhandlingmissingdatamayimpactconclusionsacomparisonofsixdifferentimputationmethodsforcategoricalquestionnairedata
AT thomasclausen howhandlingmissingdatamayimpactconclusionsacomparisonofsixdifferentimputationmethodsforcategoricalquestionnairedata
AT jorøislien howhandlingmissingdatamayimpactconclusionsacomparisonofsixdifferentimputationmethodsforcategoricalquestionnairedata
_version_ 1724534232984846336