Commentary: Indefensible Methods of Handling Missing Data in Clinical Trials. (18th October 2013)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Arndt, Stephan
• Is Part Of: Alcoholism. Volume 37:Number 12(2013:Dec.)
• Page Start: 1997
• Page End: 1998
• Publication Date: 2013-10-18
• Subjects: Alcoholism -- Periodicals; Alcoholism -- Periodicals; Alcoolisme; Electronic journals; Périodique électronique (Descripteur de forme); Ressource Internet (Descripteur de forme); 616.861005
• DOI: 10.1111/acer.12294
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0145-6008

Abstract

<abstract abstract-type="main" id="acer12294-abs-0001"> <title> <x xml:space="preserve">Abstract</x> </title> <sec id="acer12294-sec-0001" sec-type="section"> <title>Background</title> <p>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.</p> </sec> <sec id="acer12294-sec-0002" sec-type="section"> <title>Methods</title> <p>We briefly cover a few reasons why the use of more modern and defensible methods may not have completely saturated the literature.</p> </sec> <sec id="acer12294-sec-0003" sec-type="section"> <title>Results</title> <p>While some delay in complete permeation of appropriate methods is understandable, we are currently past the point for reasonable delay.</p> </sec> <sec id="acer12294-sec-0004" sec-type="section"> <title>Conclusions</title> <p>Editors and reviewers should demand appropriate statistical methods in published literature.</p> </sec> </abstract>