Improving estimation efficiency for regression with MNAR covariates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For regression with covariates missing not at random where the missingness depends on the missing covariate values, complete-case (CC) analysis leads to consistent estimation when the missingness is independent of the response given all covariates, but it may not have the desired level of efficiency. We propose a general empirical likelihood framework to improve estimation efficiency over the CC analysis. We expand on methods in Bartlett et al. (2014, Biostatistics 15, 719-730) and Xie and Zhang (2017, Int J Biostat 13, 1-20) that improve efficiency by modeling the missingness probability conditional on the response and fully observed covariates by allowing the possibility of modeling other data distribution-related quantities. We also give guidelines on what quantities to model and demonstrate that our proposal has the potential to yield smaller biases than existing methods when the missingness probability model is incorrect. Simulation studies are presented, as well as an application to data collected from the US National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".