评论：临床试验中处理缺失数据的站不住脚的方法。
Commentary: indefensible methods of handling missing data in clinical trials.
机构信息
Department of Psychiatry , Carver College of Medicine, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa; Department of Biostatistics , College of Public Health, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa; Iowa Consortium for Substance Abuse Research and Evaluation , University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa.
出版信息
Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2013 Dec;37(12):1997-8. doi: 10.1111/acer.12294. Epub 2013 Oct 18.
BACKGROUND
Literature continues to appear using inappropriate statistical methods when dealing with missing data in treatment trials. I regularly see last observation carried forward, assumed worst-case scenario, or some other static imputation method still being submitted and published in journals.
METHODS
We briefly cover a few reasons why the use of more modern and defensible methods may not have completely saturated the literature.
RESULTS
While some delay in complete permeation of appropriate methods is understandable, we are currently past the point for reasonable delay.
CONCLUSIONS
Editors and reviewers should demand appropriate statistical methods in published literature.
背景
文献中在处理治疗试验中的缺失数据时，继续使用不恰当的统计方法。我经常看到最后观察值结转、假设最差情况或其他一些静态插补方法仍在被提交和发表在期刊上。
方法
我们简要介绍了一些为什么使用更现代和更合理的方法可能尚未完全渗透到文献中的原因。
结果
虽然适当方法的完全渗透有一些延迟是可以理解的，但我们目前已经过了合理延迟的阶段。
结论
编辑和审稿人应该在已发表的文献中要求使用适当的统计方法。
Zotero 插件