Table 1.
Pointwise simulation results for estimating the transition probability of absorbing state 1 at t1 = 0.4, t2 = 0.8 and t3 = 1.2, under the naïve approach, the complete case analysis (CC) and the proposed method, under Scenario 1.
| Bias×102 | MCSD×103 | ASE×103 | CP×102 | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Method (missing) | t1 | t2 | t3 | t1 | t2 | t3 | t1 | t2 | t3 | t1 | t2 | t3 |
| n = 200 | ||||||||||||
| Naïve | 8.5 | 12.2 | 13.4 | 29.4 | 35.0 | 36.8 | 29.8 | 35.0 | 36.9 | 15.6 | 4.6 | 3.7 |
| CC (80%) | −3.9 | −5.5 | −5.6 | 39.4 | 53.8 | 64.7 | 38.6 | 53.6 | 65.0 | 74.4 | 75.7 | 80.7 |
| CC (60%) | −1.9 | −2.5 | −2.5 | 33.7 | 44.7 | 50.7 | 33.5 | 44.0 | 50.6 | 86.2 | 88.5 | 89.0 |
| Proposed (80%) | −0.2 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 42.2 | 56.4 | 62.7 | 40.0 | 53.9 | 60.1 | 92.9 | 93.4 | 92.4 |
| Proposed (60%) | −0.1 | −0.1 | −0.1 | 30.4 | 40.0 | 44.7 | 30.8 | 40.8 | 45.5 | 93.8 | 95.0 | 95.4 |
|
| ||||||||||||
| n = 400 | ||||||||||||
| Naïve | 8.7 | 12.2 | 13.6 | 21.3 | 24.6 | 26.0 | 21.1 | 24.7 | 26.1 | 0.8 | 0.1 | 0.0 |
| CC (80%) | −3.9 | −5.2 | −5.4 | 28.4 | 39.0 | 46.8 | 27.5 | 38.2 | 45.8 | 65.1 | 69.2 | 74.3 |
| CC (60%) | −1.8 | −2.3 | −2.2 | 23.9 | 31.6 | 37.0 | 23.7 | 31.1 | 35.6 | 84.1 | 85.4 | 88.0 |
| Proposed (80%) | −0.1 | −0.1 | −0.1 | 28.6 | 38.6 | 42.9 | 27.9 | 37.9 | 42.5 | 92.2 | 92.8 | 93.3 |
| Proposed (60%) | −0.1 | −0.1 | −0.1 | 21.7 | 28.6 | 31.3 | 21.6 | 28.7 | 32.0 | 94.4 | 94.8 | 94.8 |
MCSD, Monte Carlo standard deviation; ASE, average standard error; CP, coverage probability