Substantive model compatible multilevel multiple imputation: A joint modeling approach
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Substantive model compatible multiple imputation (SMC-MI) is a relatively novel imputation method that is particularly useful when the analyst's model includes interactions, non-linearities, and/or partially observed random slope variables. METHODS: Here we thoroughly investigate a SMC-MI strategy based on joint modeling of the covariates of the analysis model. We provide code to apply the proposed strategy and we perform an extensive simulation work to test it in various circumstances. We explore the impact on the results of various factors, including whether the missing data are at the individual or cluster level, whether there are non-linearities and whether the imputation model is correctly specified. Finally, we apply the imputation methods to the motivating example data. RESULTS: SMC-JM appears to be superior to standard JM imputation, particularly in presence of large variation in random slopes, non-linearities, and interactions. Results seem to be robust to slight mis-specification of the imputation model for the covariates. When imputing level 2 data, enough clusters have to be observed in order to obtain unbiased estimates of the level 2 parameters. CONCLUSIONS: SMC-JM is preferable to standard JM imputation in presence of complexities in the analysis model of interest, such as non-linearities or random slopes.
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.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it