{"title":"精神卫生服务研究中数据缺失治疗效果的倾向评分调整","authors":"B. Mayer, B. Puschner","doi":"10.2427/10214","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nBackground: Missing values are a common problem for data analyses in observational studies, which are frequently applied in health services research. This paper examines the usefulness of different approaches to tackle the problem of incomplete observational data, focusing whether the Multiple Imputation (MI) strategy yields adequate estimates when applied to a complex analysis framework. \nMethods: Based on observational study data originally comparing three forms of psychotherapy, a simulation study with different missing data scenarios was conducted. The considered analysis model comprised a propensity score-adjusted treatment effect estimation. Missing values were handled by complete case analysis, different MI approaches, as well as mean and regression imputation. \nResults: All point estimators of the applied methods lay within the 95% confidence interval of the treatment effect derived from the complete simulation data set. Highest deviation was observed for complete case analysis. A distinct superiority of MI methods could not be demonstrated. \nConclusion: Since there was no clear benefit of one method to deal with missing values over another, health services researchers faced with incomplete observational data are well-advised to apply different imputation methods and compare the results in order to get an impression of their sensitivity. \n","PeriodicalId":45811,"journal":{"name":"Epidemiology Biostatistics and Public Health","volume":"15 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Propensity score adjustment of a treatment effect with missing data in psychiatric health services research\",\"authors\":\"B. Mayer, B. Puschner\",\"doi\":\"10.2427/10214\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nBackground: Missing values are a common problem for data analyses in observational studies, which are frequently applied in health services research. This paper examines the usefulness of different approaches to tackle the problem of incomplete observational data, focusing whether the Multiple Imputation (MI) strategy yields adequate estimates when applied to a complex analysis framework. \\nMethods: Based on observational study data originally comparing three forms of psychotherapy, a simulation study with different missing data scenarios was conducted. The considered analysis model comprised a propensity score-adjusted treatment effect estimation. Missing values were handled by complete case analysis, different MI approaches, as well as mean and regression imputation. \\nResults: All point estimators of the applied methods lay within the 95% confidence interval of the treatment effect derived from the complete simulation data set. Highest deviation was observed for complete case analysis. A distinct superiority of MI methods could not be demonstrated. \\nConclusion: Since there was no clear benefit of one method to deal with missing values over another, health services researchers faced with incomplete observational data are well-advised to apply different imputation methods and compare the results in order to get an impression of their sensitivity. \\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":45811,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Epidemiology Biostatistics and Public Health\",\"volume\":\"15 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-05-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Epidemiology Biostatistics and Public Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2427/10214\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Nursing\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Epidemiology Biostatistics and Public Health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2427/10214","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Nursing","Score":null,"Total":0}
Propensity score adjustment of a treatment effect with missing data in psychiatric health services research
Background: Missing values are a common problem for data analyses in observational studies, which are frequently applied in health services research. This paper examines the usefulness of different approaches to tackle the problem of incomplete observational data, focusing whether the Multiple Imputation (MI) strategy yields adequate estimates when applied to a complex analysis framework.
Methods: Based on observational study data originally comparing three forms of psychotherapy, a simulation study with different missing data scenarios was conducted. The considered analysis model comprised a propensity score-adjusted treatment effect estimation. Missing values were handled by complete case analysis, different MI approaches, as well as mean and regression imputation.
Results: All point estimators of the applied methods lay within the 95% confidence interval of the treatment effect derived from the complete simulation data set. Highest deviation was observed for complete case analysis. A distinct superiority of MI methods could not be demonstrated.
Conclusion: Since there was no clear benefit of one method to deal with missing values over another, health services researchers faced with incomplete observational data are well-advised to apply different imputation methods and compare the results in order to get an impression of their sensitivity.
期刊介绍:
Epidemiology, Biostatistics, and Public Health (EBPH) is a multidisciplinary journal that has two broad aims: -To support the international public health community with publications on health service research, health care management, health policy, and health economics. -To strengthen the evidences on effective preventive interventions. -To advance public health methods, including biostatistics and epidemiology. EBPH welcomes submissions on all public health issues (including topics like eHealth, big data, personalized prevention, epidemiology and risk factors of chronic and infectious diseases); on basic and applied research in epidemiology; and in biostatistics methodology. Primary studies, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses are all welcome, as are research protocols for observational and experimental studies. EBPH aims to be a cross-discipline, international forum for scientific integration and evidence-based policymaking, combining the methodological aspects of epidemiology, biostatistics, and public health research with their practical applications.