Journal
PHARMACEUTICAL STATISTICS
Volume 7, Issue 2, Pages 93-106Publisher
WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/pst.267
Keywords
missing data; LOCF; MMRM; longitudinal trial; drop-out
Categories
Ask authors/readers for more resources
This study compares two methods for handling missing data in longitudinal trials: one using the last-observation-carried-forward (LOCF) method and one based on a multivariate or mixed model for repeated measurements (MMRM). Using data sets simulated to match six actual trials, I imposed several drop-out mechanisms, and compared the methods in terms of bias in the treatment difference and power of the treatment comparison. With equal drop-out in Active and Placebo arms, LOCF generally underestimated the treatment effect; but with unequal drop-out, bias could be much larger and in either direction. In contrast, bias with the MMRM method was much smaller; and whereas MMRM rarely caused a difference in power of greater than 20%, LOCF caused a difference in power of greater than 20% in nearly half the simulations. Use of the LOCF method is therefore likely to misrepresent the results of a trial seriously, and so is not a good choice for primary analysis. In contrast, the MMRM method is unlikely to result in serious misinterpretation, unless the drop-out mechanism is missing not at random (MNAR) and there is substantially unequal drop-out. Moreover, MMRM is clearly more reliable and better grounded statistically. Neither method is capable of dealing on its own with trials involving MNAR drop-out mechanisms,for which sensitivity analysis is needed using more complex methods. Copyright (C) 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available