Case-cohort studies are conducted within cohort studies, wherein collection of exposure data is limited to a subset of the cohort, leading to a large proportion of missing data by design. Standard analysis uses inverse probability weighting (IPW) to address this intended missing data, but little research has been conducted into how best to perform analysis when there is also unintended missingness. Multiple imputation (MI) has become a default standard for handling unintended missingness, but when used in combination with IPW, the imputation model needs to take account of the weighting to ensure compatibility with the analysis model. Alternatively, MI could be used to handle both the intended and unintended missingness. While the performance of a solely MI approach has been investigated in the context of a case-cohort study with a time-to-event outcome, it is unclear how this approach performs with binary outcomes. We conducted a simulation study to assess and compare the performance of approaches using only MI, only IPW, and a combination of MI and IPW, for handling intended and unintended missingness in this setting. We also applied the approaches to a case study. Our results show that the combined approach is approximately unbiased for estimation of the exposure effect when the sample size is large, and was the least biased with small sample sizes, while MI-only or IPW-only exhibited larger biases in both sample size settings. These findings suggest that MI is the preferred approach to handle intended and unintended missing data in case-cohort studies with binary outcomes.
翻译:在组群研究中进行案例研究,在群群研究中收集接触数据仅限于组群的一个子组,从而导致大量数据被设计为缺失。标准分析使用反概率加权法来处理这一有意缺失的数据,但对于在出现意外缺失的情况下如何以最佳方式进行分析却很少进行研究。多重估算(MI)已成为处理意外缺失的默认标准,但当与IPW结合使用时,估算模型需要考虑到加权以确保与分析模型的兼容性。或者,MI可用于处理预期和意外缺失的两种情况。在对单一MI方法的性能进行了反概率加权(IPW),以解决这一预期缺失数据,但在对案件组群的研究中,虽然对单一MI方法的性能进行了反比重(IPW)进行了反比重(IPW)研究,但对于如何在出现二进制结果时进行最佳分析。我们进行了模拟研究,评估并比较了方法的性能,仅使用MIW和IPW的混合方法,以便处理此环境中的有意和无意缺失的缺失情况。我们还运用了方法处理案例研究。虽然只调查了只调查MI方法,但我们的结果表明,在粗略的样本中,在深度和误判的样本中,但是,其结果显示IP的混合方法与误判的深度分析是大为。