Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40960424›Full record

ArticleStatistics in medicine2025

Handling Missing Outcome Data in Cluster Randomized Trials With Both Individual- and Cluster-Level Dropout.

Analissa Avila, Beth A Glenn, Roshan Bastani, Catherine M Crespi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Statistics in medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Analissa AvilaDepartment of Biostatistics, Fielding School of Public Health, UCLA, Los Angeles, California, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0007-0075-2498
Beth A GlennDepartment of Health Policy and Management, Fielding School of Public Health, UCLA, Los Angeles, California, USA.
Roshan BastaniDepartment of Health Policy and Management, Fielding School of Public Health, UCLA, Los Angeles, California, USA.
Catherine M CrespiDepartment of Biostatistics, Fielding School of Public Health, UCLA, Los Angeles, California, USA.

Funding

Women's CancersP30CA016042 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES · PI Robert Damoiseaux · 1985 to 2026
$134.5M
Promoting Hepatitis B Screening for Vietnamese American AdultsP01CA109091 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT DAVIS · PI CHEN, MOON SHAO-CHUANG · 2006 to 2010
$7.8M
NCI NIH HHS P01 CA109091NCI NIH HHS P30 CA016042NIH HHS P01 CA109091-01A1NIH HHS P30 CA016402
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Missing outcome data are common in cluster randomized trials (CRTs), which can complicate inference. Further, the missingness can occur due to dropout of individuals, termed sporadically missing data, or dropout of clusters, termed systematically missing data, and these two types of missingness could have potentially different missing data mechanisms. We aimed to develop a well-performing and practical approach to handle inference in CRTs when outcome data may be both sporadically and systematically missing. To this end, we first examined the performance of several multilevel multiple imputation (MI) methods to handle sporadically and systematically missing CRT outcome data via a simulation study. Specifically, we examined performance under a multilevel covariate-dependent missingness assumption. Our findings indicated that several full conditional specification (FCS) methods designed for missingness in linear mixed models performed well under various scenarios, while an FCS approach using a two-stage estimator often performed poorly. We then developed methods for conducting sensitivity analysis to test the robustness of inferences under different missing at random (MAR) and missing not at random (MNAR) assumptions. The methods allow for different MNAR assumptions for cluster dropout and individual dropout to reflect that they may arise from different missing data mechanisms. We used graphical displays to visualize sensitivity analysis results. Our methods are illustrated using a real data application.

Indexed as

Patient DropoutsRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicCluster AnalysisComputer SimulationData Interpretation, StatisticalHumansLinear ModelsModels, Statisticalclustered datamissing datamissing not at randommultiple imputationsystematically missing

Identifiers

PMID40960424
PMCPMC13459020

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.