WHEN MISSING DATA ARE NOT MISSING: A NEW APPROACH TO EVALUATING SUPPLEMENTAL HOMICIDE REPORT IMPUTATION STRATEGIES*

The Supplemental Homicide Reports (SHR) are widely used in criminological research and inform a broad range of research topics and subsequent policy applications. A serious issue with the SHR is missing information about the offender and incident in many recorded homicides. Although it is convenient to discard cases with missing data before analysis, such discarding is not theoretically justified and can lead to incorrect substantive conclusions. Recently, several techniques for imputing missing SHR data have been proposed, but it is difficult to evaluate their effectiveness. This research presents a new approach to testing and evaluating SHR imputation techniques. Offender data that are missing in the SHR are often found in police records available for individual cities. We examine similarities and differences among cases with known offender characteristics in the SHR, cases with such information missing in the SHR but available in police records, and cases with such information missing in both sources. We then use these data sets to evaluate four different imputation techniques suggested in the literature (Fox, 2004; Messner, Deane, and Beaulieu, 2002; Pampel and Williams, 2000; Regoeczi and Riedel, 2003). We apply each imputation technique to the SHR, and for cases with information missing in the SHR but known in the police records, we see how well the imputed values correspond both with the individual known values and with the overall distributions in the police records. We discuss the outcome of our assessment of these strategies, and we outline important implications this assessment has for research using SHR data.     

Governing Genetic Databases: Challenges Facing Research Regulation and Practice

This paper reports on the initial findings of an interdisciplinary research project on the governance of human genetic databases in England and Wales. The number of biosample and information collections has expanded, yet considerable legal uncertainty surrounds their definition, collection, storage, management, and use which could inhibit research and clinical practice, while failing to protect the rights and interests of all stakeholders. We report some initial findings from the legal research and identify major challenges associated with defining 'genetic databases'. We identify a wide range of relevant instruments and regulatory actors, and suggest that none adequately addresses the challenges posed by contemporary research techniques or the'corporeal'and'informational'materials used in the genetic databases context. This preliminary analysis seriously questions the efficacy of the current regulatory framework and concludes that developing an appropriate governance framework for the creation, maintenance, and use of genetic databases requires the bringing together of legal analysis with good quality empirical evidence.