Abstract
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Abowd, J.M. and L. Vilhuber. 2008. “How Protective are Synthetic Data?” In Privacy in Statistical Databases , edited by J. Domingo-Ferrer and V. Yucel, 239–246. New York: Springer.
2.
Drechsler, J., A. Dundler, S. Bender, S. Rässler, and T. Zwick. 2008. “A New Approach for Disclosure Control in the IAB Establishment Panel – Multiple Imputation for a Better Data Access.” Advances in Statistical Analysis 92: 439–458. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10182-008-0090-1.
3.
Drechsler, J. and J.P. Reiter. 2010. “Sampling with Synthesis: a New Approach for Releasing Public Use Census Microdata.” Journal of the American Statistical Association 105: 1347–1357. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1198/jasa.2010.ap09480.
4.
Duncan, G.T. and D. Lambert. 1989. “The Risk of Disclosure for Microdata.” Journal of Business and Economic Statistics 7: 207–217. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07350015.1989.10509729.
5.
Harel, O. and J.L. Schafer. 2003. “Multiple Imputation in Two Stages.” In Proceedings of Federal Committee on Statistical Methodology 2003 Conference, November 17–19, 2003, Washington DC. Available at: http://fcsm.sites.usa.gov/files/2014/05/2003FCSM_Harel.pdf (accessed August 2017).
6.
Karr, A.F., C.N. Kohnen, A. Oganian, J.P. Reiter, and A.P. Sanil. 2006. “A Framework for Evaluating the Utility of Data Altered to Protect Confidentiality.” The American Statistician 60: 224–232. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1198/000313006X124640.
7.
Li, F., M. Baccini, F. Mealli, E.Z. Zell, C.E. Frangakis, and D.B. Rubin. 2014. “Multiple Imputation by Ordered Monotone Blocks, with Applications to the Anthrax Vaccine Adsorbed Trial.” Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics 23: 877–892. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10618600.2013.826583.
8.
Meng, X.L. 1994. “Multiple-Imputation Inferences with Uncongenial Sources of Input.” Statistical Science 9: 538–558. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1214/ss/1177010269.
9.
Neyman, J. 1934. “On Two Different Aspects of the Representative Method: The Method of Stratified Sampling and the Method of Purposive Selection (with Discussion).” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society 97: 558–625.
10.
Raghunathan, T.E. and D.B. Rubin. 2000. “Bayesian Multiple Imputation to Preserve Confidentiality in Public-Use Data Sets.” In Proceedings of ISBA 2000 – The Sixth World Meeting of the International Society for Bayesian Analysis, Crete, May 2000.
11.
Raghunathan, T.E., J.M. Lepkowski, J. van Hoewyk, and P. Solenberger. 2001. “A Multivariate Technique for Multiply Imputing Missing Values Using a Series of Regression Models.” Survey Methodology 27: 85–96.
12.
Raghunathan, T.E., J.P. Reiter, and D.B. Rubin. 2003. “Multiple Imputation for Statistical Disclosure Limitation.” Journal of Official Statistics 19: 1–16.
13.
Reiter, J.P. 2002. “Satisfying Disclosure Restrictions with Synthetic Datasets.” Journal of Official Statistics 18: 531–543.
14.
Reiter, J.P. 2003. “Inference for Partially Synthetic, Public Use Microdata Sets.” Survey Methodology 29: 181–189.
15.
Reiter, J.P. 2005a. “Releasing Multiply Imputed Synthetic Public Use Microdata: An Illustration and Empirical Study.” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A 168: 185–205. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-985X.2004.00343.x.
16.
Reiter, J.P. 2005b. “Significance Tests for Multi-Component Estimands from Multiply Imputed, Synthetic Microdata.” Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference 131: 365–377. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jspi.2004.02.003.
17.
Reiter, J.P. 2009. “Multiple Imputation for Disclosure Limitation: Future Research Challenges.” Journal of Privacy and Confidentiality 1: 223–233.
18.
Reiter, J.P., T.E. Raghunathan, and S. Kinney. 2006. “The Importance of Modelling the Sampling Design in Multiple Imputation for Missing Data.” Survey Methodology 32: 143–149.
19.
Reiter, J.P. and R. Mitra. 2009. “Estimating Risks of Identification and Disclosure in Partially Synthetic Data.” Journal of Privacy and Confidentiality 1: 99–110.
20.
Reiter, J.P. and J. Drechsler. 2010. “Two Stage Multiple Imputation to Protect Confidentiality.” Statistica Sinica 20: 405–422.
21.
Reiter, J.P., Q. Wang, and B.E. Zhang. 2014. “Bayesian Estimation of Disclosure Risks for Multiply Imputed, Synthetic Data.” Journal of Privacy and Confidentiality 6: 17–33.
22.
Rubin, D.B. 1978. “Multiple Imputation in Sample Surveys.” In Proceedings of the Survey Research Methods Section of the American Statistical Association, 20–34. Alexandria, VA: American Statistical Association, August 14-17, San Diego. Available at: https://ww2.amstat.org/sections/srms/Proceedings/papers/1978_004.pdf (accessed August 2017).
23.
Rubin, D.B. 1987. Multiple Imputation for Nonresponse in Surveys . New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
24.
Rubin, D.B. 1993. “Discussion: Statistical Disclosure Limitation.” Journal of Official Statistics 9: 461–468.
25.
Rubin, D.B. 2003. “Nested Multiple Imputation of NMES via Partially Incompatible MCMC.” Statistica Neerlandica 57: 3–18. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-9574.00217.
26.
Schafer, J.L. 1997. Analysis of Incomplete Multivariate Data . London: Chapman & Hall.
27.
Shen, Z. 2000. Nested Multiple Imputation . Ph.D. thesis, Harvard University, Dept. of Statistics: Cambridge, MA.
28.
Van Buuren, S. and C.G.M. Oudshoorn. 2000. Multivariate Imputation by Chained Equations: MICE v1.0 user’s manual . Leiden: TNO. Available at: http://www.stefvanbuuren.nl/publications/mice%20v1.0%20manual%20tno00038%202000.pdf (accessed september 2017).
29.
Woo, M.J., J.P. Reiter, A. Oganian, and A.F. Karr. 2009. “Global Measures of Data Utility for Microdata Masked for Disclosure Limitation.” Journal of Privacy and Confidentiality 1: 111–124.
30.
Xie, X. and X.L. Meng. 2014. “Dissecting Multiple Imputation from a Multi-Phase Inference Perspective: What Happens When God’s, Imputer’s and Analyst’s Models are Uncongenial?” Statistica Sinica . Preprint. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.5705/ss.2014.067.
