On Thu, 15 Jan 2004 08:37:09 -0500 (EST)
Alan Zaslavsky <[email protected]> wrote:

> 
> > Subject: IMPUTE: The art of imputation: thinking about MAR
> > Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 10:09:16 -0600
> > From: "Howells, William" <[email protected]>
> >
> > We put a lot of thought into
> > building the imputation model and were careful to include other
> > covariates that were highly correlated with X2 and all those that we
> > want in the analysis model (note: did not include time to death
> > because of censoring and not MVN). 
> 
> This is the feature of the analysis that most concerns me.  Essentially
> what this does is to assume conditional independence of X2 and time to
> death given the other variables, which of course attenuates the
> relationship when you analyze a dataset including both observed and
> imputed values of X2.  (The impact of this on estimated effect of the
> variable of interest X1 is not at all obvious, although you might be
> able to figure it out from looking at relationships of X1 and X2, etc.) 
> I appreciate that modeling missing data with censored survival data is
> nonstandard and therefore messy (perhaps impossible to do "correctly"
> with any available standard software), but you are better off including
> this crucial relationship with some kind of approximate model than
> leaving it out altogether.
> 
> To do this using PROC MI, one idea would be to create a few indicators
> for survival for 3 months, 6 months, 9 months, etc.  (or whatever is
> appropriate to the time scale of your disease process).  Censored
> observations have missing indicators for the time points later than time
> of censoring.  Then throw this into PROC MI.  You will not use the
> imputed values of the missing indicators, but this is a mechanism for
> using the censored survival data within an MVN imputation framework.
> (There might be some obvious reason why this won't work, but try it and
> see.) Of course this model is "wrong" but if higher X2 is actually
> associated with better prognosis, then using the outcomes in predicting
> X2 should help to predict this.

Alan - this makes a lot of sense.  I wonder whether a simpler approach
would also work: include the censoring/event time, event indicator, and
product of these two in an imputation model.  In imputation methods that
allow for nonlinear effects, nonlinear terms could also be added.  -Frank

---
Frank E Harrell Jr   Professor and Chair           School of Medicine
                     Department of Biostatistics   Vanderbilt University

Reply via email to