Type I Error Rates from Mixed Effects Model Repeated Measures Versus Fixed Effects Anova with Missing Values Imputed Via Last Observation Carried Forward

By C. Mallinckrodt, W. Clark, S. David. 2001

143 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

MMRM vs. LOCF: A Comprehensive Comparison Based on Simulation Study and 25 NDA Datasets (2009, methodology): “Several researchers, including Mallinckrodt et al. (2001), David and Mallinckrodt (2001), Liu and Gould (2002), Lane (2008), and Barnes et al. (2008), have published simulation study results to compare the performance of LOCF analysis with likelihood-based analysis in evaluating treatment efficacy…”
Move over ANOVA: progress in analyzing repeated-measures data and its reflection in papers published in the Archives of General Psychiatry. (2004, methodology): “Tradit ional and mixed-effects approaches produce biased results in the presence of informative dropout, but the bias may be smaller in mixed-effects models.(6,7) Mixed models can also be used for sensitivity analysis.”
Analyzing incomplete longitudinal clinical trial data. (2004, methodology): “Nevertheless, ignorable analyses may provide reasonably stable results, even when the assumption of MAR is violated, in the sense that such analyses constrain the behavior of the unseen data to be similar to that of the observed data (Mallinckrodt et al 2001ab).”