Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41721240›Full record

ArticleBMC medical research methodology2026

A novel average treatment effect estimation approach for integrated incomplete datasets, with application in childhood anemia.

Asrat Ayele Woldemariam, Yingchun Zhou, Yuqi Qiu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Asrat Ayele WoldemariamKey Laboratory of Advanced Theory and Application in Statistics and Data Science-MOE, School of Statistics, East China Normal University, 3663 North Zhongshan Road, Shanghai, 200062, People's Republic of China.
Yingchun ZhouKey Laboratory of Advanced Theory and Application in Statistics and Data Science-MOE, School of Statistics, East China Normal University, 3663 North Zhongshan Road, Shanghai, 200062, People's Republic of China.
Yuqi QiuKey Laboratory of Advanced Theory and Application in Statistics and Data Science-MOE, School of Statistics, East China Normal University, 3663 North Zhongshan Road, Shanghai, 200062, People's Republic of China. yqqiu@fem.ecnu.edu.cn.

Funding

National Natural Science Foundation of China 12401347, 12571283 and 72331005Shanghai Municipal Education Commission 2024AI01002Shanghai Natural Science Foundation 24ZR1420400Shanghai "Science and Technology Innovation Action Plan" Computational Biology Key Project 23JS1400500 and 23JS1400800
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIntegrating multiple observational datasets from disparate sources remains fundamentally challenging when validation data are absent. These pooled datasets typically contain incomplete records with substantial missingness, necessitating careful handling to ensure valid causal inference. For estimating average treatment effect (ATE) from such incomplete data, conventional approaches employ a two-step procedure: multiple imputation precedes propensity score estimation. However, a critical methodological limitation is that the imputation often operates independently of causal assumptions, potentially compromising subsequent ATE estimation. Without validation data, the accuracy of imputed values becomes inherently uncertain, resulting in diminished statistical efficiency. Standard imputation methods may inadvertently undermine the very causal structures they aim to preserve, representing a fundamental gap in practice.

methodsWe propose a one-step framework for estimating the ATE that simultaneously imputes missing data and estimates causal effects by incorporating the propensity score directly into the multiple imputation process. Missing values are thus imputed in alignment with causal inference assumptions required for observational studies. Unlike two-step methods that estimate propensity scores separately for each imputed dataset, our approach updates them iteratively: completed data inform propensity score estimation, which then guides the subsequent imputation cycle. Within this iterative architecture, internal consistency is structurally guaranteed; consequently, the computational burden of second-stage estimation is removed, optimizing statistical power in pooled analyses.

resultsAcross varied missingness patterns and sample sizes, the proposed method demonstrates superior performance. Its estimates are unbiased, with lower variance and reduced root mean square error relative to conventional two-step procedures. Applied to childhood anemia data from Sierra Leone Demographic and Health Surveys (2008, 2013, 2019), the framework yields efficient causal estimates both individually and when datasets are combined. A consistent finding shows that improved maternal education causally reduces anemia risk among children under five years.

conclusionsBy integrating propensity scores into imputation processes, the proposed framework addresses a longstanding gap in causal inference under multiple incomplete observational datasets, without requiring validation data. When applied to Sierra Leone survey, robust evidence of maternal education’s protective effect against childhood anemia is provided. The framework’s implementation requires only standard multiple imputation software, representing a practical advantage for survey analysts conducting causal inference with incomplete data.

Indexed as

AnemiaOutcome Assessment, Health CareAlgorithmsChildData Interpretation, StatisticalHumansObservational Studies as TopicPropensity ScoreTreatment OutcomeAverage treatment effectChildhood anemiaData integrationIncomplete observational dataPropensity score

Identifiers

PMID41721240
PMCPMC13032434

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.