A comparison of existing methods for multiple imputation in individual participant data meta‐analysis

• Published in: Statistics in medicine Vol. 36; no. 22; pp. 3507 - 3532
• Main Authors: Kunkel, Deborah, Kaizar, Eloise E.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: England Wiley Subscription Services, Inc 30.09.2017
• Subjects: Adolescent; Algorithms; Bias; Brain Injuries, Traumatic; chained equations; Child; Child, Preschool; Computer Simulation; Data Interpretation, Statistical; Female; fully conditional specification; Humans; joint model; Likelihood Functions; Male; Maximum likelihood method; Medical statistics; Meta-analysis; Meta-Analysis as Topic; Models, Statistical; Multilevel Analysis; systematic missingness; Traumatic brain injury; systematic missingness; chained equations; joint model; fully conditional specification
• ISSN: 0277-6715; 1097-0258
• DOI: 10.1002/sim.7388

Multiple imputation is a popular method for addressing missing data, but its implementation is difficult when data have a multilevel structure and one or more variables are systematically missing. This systematic missing data pattern may commonly occur in meta‐analysis of individual participant data, where some variables are never observed in some studies, but are present in other hierarchical data settings. In these cases, valid imputation must account for both relationships between variables and correlation within studies. Proposed methods for multilevel imputation include specifying a full joint model and multiple imputation with chained equations (MICE). While MICE is attractive for its ease of implementation, there is little existing work describing conditions under which this is a valid alternative to specifying the full joint model. We present results showing that for multilevel normal models, MICE is rarely exactly equivalent to joint model imputation. Through a simulation study and an example using data from a traumatic brain injury study, we found that in spite of theoretical differences, MICE imputations often produce results similar to those obtained using the joint model. We also assess the influence of prior distributions in MICE imputation methods and find that when missingness is high, prior choices in MICE models tend to affect estimation of across‐study variability more than compatibility of conditional likelihoods. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.