• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Clinical Epidemiology >A systematic survey of the methods literature on the reporting quality and optimal methods of handling participants with missing outcome data for continuous outcomes in randomized controlled trials
【24h】

A systematic survey of the methods literature on the reporting quality and optimal methods of handling participants with missing outcome data for continuous outcomes in randomized controlled trials

机译：对随机对照试验连续成果的缺失结果数据处理参与者的报告质量和最佳方法的系统调查

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Abstract Objective To conduct (1) a systematic survey of the reporting quality of simulation studies dealing with how to handle missing participant data (MPD) in randomized control trials and (2) summarize the findings of these studies. Study Design and Setting We included simulation studies comparing statistical methods dealing with continuous MPD in randomized controlled trials addressing bias, precision, coverage, accuracy, power, type-I error, and overall ranking. For the reporting of simulation studies, we adapted previously developed criteria for reporting quality and applied them to eligible studies. Results Of 16,446 identified citations, the 60 eligible generally had important limitations in reporting, particularly in reporting simulation procedures. Of the 60 studies, 47 addressed ignorable and 32 addressed nonignorable data. For ignorable missing data, mixed model was most frequently the best on overall ranking (9 times best, 34.6% of times tested) and bias (10, 55.6%). Multiple imputation was also performed well. For nonignorable data, mixed model was most frequently the best on overall ranking (7, 46.7%) and bias (8, 57.1%). Mixed model performance varied on other criteria. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) was very seldom the best performing, and for nonignorable MPD frequently the worst. Conclusion Simulation studies addressing methods to deal with MPD suffered from serious limitations. The mixed model approach was superior to other methods in terms of overall performance and bias. LOCF performed worst.
机译：摘要目的进行（1）对如何处理随机控制试验中缺失参与者数据（MPD）的仿真研究报告质量的系统调查，并总结了这些研究的结果。研究设计和设置我们包括仿真研究比较统计方法处理随机对照试验中的连续MPD，解决偏见，精度，覆盖，准确性，功率，类型误差和整体排名。为了报告模拟研究，我们改进了先前开发了报告质量的标准，并将其应用于合格的研究。结果16,446名已识别的引文，60项符合条件的符合条件的报告中的重要局限性，特别是在报告模拟程序时。在60项研究中，47个寻址无知和32个寻址的非无知数据。对于无知的缺失数据，混合模型最常见于整体排名（最佳9倍，34.6％的时间）和偏差（10,55.6％）。多种估算也很好。对于非无知数据，混合模型最常见于整体排名（7,46.7％）和偏差（8,57.1％）。混合模型性能在其他标准上变化。上次观察（LOCF）非常迅索，最常见的是最糟糕的MPD。结论仿真研究解决了处理MPD遭受严重局限性的方法。在整体性能和偏置方面，混合模型方法优于其他方法。 Locf表现最差。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号