When estimating causal effects, careful handling of missing data is needed to avoid bias. Complete-case analysis is commonly used in epidemiologic analyses. Previous work has shown that covariate-stratified effect estimates from complete-case analysis are unbiased when missingness is independent of the outcome conditional on the exposure and covariates. Here, we assess the bias of complete-case analysis for adjusted marginal effects when confounding is present under various causal structures of missing data. We show that estimation of the marginal risk difference requires an unbiased estimate of the unconditional joint distribution of confounders and any other covariates required for conditional independence of missingness and outcome. The dependence of missing data on these covariates must be considered to obtain a valid estimate of the covariate distribution. If none of these covariates are effect-measure modifiers on the absolute scale, however, the marginal risk difference will equal the stratified risk differences and the complete-case analysis will be unbiased when the stratified effect estimates are unbiased. Estimation of unbiased marginal effects in complete-case analysis therefore requires close consideration of causal structure and effect-measure modification.
Keywords: complete-case analysis; conditional estimates; epidemiologic methods; heterogeneity; marginal estimates; missing data; risk differences.
© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.