Handling missing data in propensity score estimation in comparative effectiveness evaluations: a systematic review.

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Malla L, Perera-Salazar R, McFadden E, Ogero M, Stepniewska K, English M.
dc.date.accessioned 2024-09-04T09:02:07Z
dc.date.available 2024-09-04T09:02:07Z
dc.date.issued 2018-03
dc.identifier.uri https://doi.org/10.2217/cer-2017-0071
dc.identifier.uri http://repository.kemri.go.ke:8080/xmlui/handle/123456789/1067
dc.description.abstract Aim: Even though systematic reviews have examined how aspects of propensity score methods are used, none has reviewed how the challenge of missing data is addressed with these methods. This review therefore describes how missing data are addressed with propensity score methods in observational comparative effectiveness studies. Methods: Published articles on observational comparative effectiveness studies were extracted from MEDLINE and EMBASE databases. Results: Our search yielded 167 eligible articles. Majority of these studies (114; 68%) conducted complete case analysis with only 53 of them stating this in the methods. Only 16 articles reported use of multiple imputation. Conclusion: Few researchers use correct methods for handling missing data or reported missing data methodology which may lead to reporting biased findings. en_US
dc.language.iso en en_US
dc.publisher Journal of comparative effectiveness research. en_US
dc.subject comparative effectiveness; missing data; propensity score. en_US
dc.title Handling missing data in propensity score estimation in comparative effectiveness evaluations: a systematic review. en_US
dc.type Article en_US


Files in this item

Files Size Format View

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Search DSpace


Advanced Search

Browse

My Account