scholarly journals Handling missing data in an FFQ: multiple imputation and nutrient intake estimates

2019 ◽  
Vol 22 (8) ◽  
pp. 1351-1360 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mari Ichikawa ◽  
Akihiro Hosono ◽  
Yuya Tamai ◽  
Miki Watanabe ◽  
Kiyoshi Shibata ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Missing Data ◽  
Multiple Imputation ◽  
Nutrient Intake ◽  
Missing Values ◽  
Personal Characteristics ◽  
Missing Not At Random ◽  
Food Items ◽  
Self Administered Questionnaire ◽  
Better Than

AbstractObjectiveWe aimed to examine missing data in FFQ and to assess the effects on estimating dietary intake by comparing between multiple imputation and zero imputation.DesignWe used data from the Okazaki Japan Multi-Institutional Collaborative Cohort (J-MICC) study. A self-administered questionnaire including an FFQ was implemented at baseline (FFQ1) and 5-year follow-up (FFQ2). Missing values in FFQ2 were replaced by corresponding FFQ1 values, multiple imputation and zero imputation.SettingA methodological sub-study of the Okazaki J-MICC study.ParticipantsOf a total of 7585 men and women aged 35–79 years at baseline, we analysed data for 5120 participants who answered all items in FFQ1 and at least 50% of items in FFQ2.ResultsAmong 5120 participants, the proportion of missing data was 3·7%. The increasing number of missing food items in FFQ2 varied with personal characteristics. Missing food items not eaten often in FFQ2 were likely to represent zero intake in FFQ1. Most food items showed that the observed proportion of zero intake was likely to be similar to the probability that the missing value is zero intake. Compared with FFQ1 values, multiple imputation had smaller differences of total energy and nutrient estimates, except for alcohol, than zero imputation.ConclusionsOur results indicate that missing values due to zero intake, namely missing not at random, in FFQ can be predicted reasonably well from observed data. Multiple imputation performed better than zero imputation for most nutrients and may be applied to FFQ data when missing is low.

scholarly journals What difference does multiple imputation make in longitudinal modeling of EQ-5D-5L data? Empirical analyses of simulated and observed missing data patterns

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Inka Rösel ◽  
Lina María Serna-Higuita ◽  
Fatima Al Sayah ◽  
Maresa Buchholz ◽  
Ines Buchholz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Missing Data ◽  
Multiple Imputation ◽  
Mixed Models ◽  
Missing Values ◽  
Life Questionnaire ◽  
Related Quality ◽  
Health Related ◽  
Baseline Covariates

Abstract Purpose Although multiple imputation is the state-of-the-art method for managing missing data, mixed models without multiple imputation may be equally valid for longitudinal data. Additionally, it is not clear whether missing values in multi-item instruments should be imputed at item or score-level. We therefore explored the differences in analyzing the scores of a health-related quality of life questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L) using four approaches in two empirical datasets. Methods We used simulated (GR dataset) and observed missingness patterns (ABCD dataset) in EQ-5D-5L scores to investigate the following approaches: approach-1) mixed models using respondents with complete cases, approach-2) mixed models using all available data, approach-3) mixed models after multiple imputation of the EQ-5D-5L scores, and approach-4) mixed models after multiple imputation of EQ-5D 5L items. Results Approach-1 yielded the highest estimates of all approaches (ABCD, GR), increasingly overestimating the EQ-5D-5L score with higher percentages of missing data (GR). Approach-4 produced the lowest scores at follow-up evaluations (ABCD, GR). Standard errors (0.006–0.008) and mean squared errors (0.032–0.035) increased with increasing percentages of simulated missing GR data. Approaches 2 and 3 showed similar results (both datasets). Conclusion Complete cases analyses overestimated the scores and mixed models after multiple imputation by items yielded the lowest scores. As there was no loss of accuracy, mixed models without multiple imputation, when baseline covariates are complete, might be the most parsimonious choice to deal with missing data. However, multiple imputation may be needed when baseline covariates are missing and/or more than two timepoints are considered.

scholarly journals Weighted multiple imputation of ethnicity data that are missing not at random in primary care databases

2017 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Tra My Pham ◽  
Irene Petersen ◽  
James Carpenter ◽  
Tim Morris
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Missing Data ◽  
Multiple Imputation ◽  
Simulation Study ◽  
Case Analysis ◽  
Missing At Random ◽  
Complete Case ◽  
Missing Not At Random ◽  
Health Records ◽  
Ethnicity Data

ABSTRACT BackgroundEthnicity is an important factor to be considered in health research because of its association with inequality in disease prevalence and the utilisation of healthcare. Ethnicity recording has been incorporated in primary care electronic health records, and hence is available in large UK primary care databases such as The Health Improvement Network (THIN). However, since primary care data are routinely collected for clinical purposes, a large amount of data that are relevant for research including ethnicity is often missing. A popular approach for missing data is multiple imputation (MI). However, the conventional MI method assuming data are missing at random does not give plausible estimates of the ethnicity distribution in THIN compared to the general UK population. This might be due to the fact that ethnicity data in primary care are likely to be missing not at random. ObjectivesI propose a new MI method, termed ‘weighted multiple imputation’, to deal with data that are missing not at random in categorical variables.MethodsWeighted MI combines MI and probability weights which are calculated using external data sources. Census summary statistics for ethnicity can be used to form weights in weighted MI such that the correct marginal ethnic breakdown is recovered in THIN. I conducted a simulation study to examine weighted MI when ethnicity data are missing not at random. In this simulation study which resembled a THIN dataset, ethnicity was an independent variable in a survival model alongside other covariates. Weighted MI was compared to the conventional MI and other traditional missing data methods including complete case analysis and single imputation.ResultsWhile a small bias was still present in ethnicity coefficient estimates under weighted MI, it was less severe compared to MI assuming missing at random. Complete case analysis and single imputation were inadequate to handle data that are missing not at random in ethnicity.ConclusionsAlthough not a total cure, weighted MI represents a pragmatic approach that has potential applications not only in ethnicity but also in other incomplete categorical health indicators in electronic health records.

scholarly journals Comparison of Missing Data Infilling Mechanisms for Recovering a Real-World Single Station Streamflow Observation

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (16) ◽  
pp. 8375
Author(s):  
Thelma Dede Baddoo ◽  
Zhijia Li ◽  
Samuel Nii Odai ◽  
Kenneth Rodolphe Chabi Boni ◽  
Isaac Kwesi Nooni ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Missing Data ◽  
Multiple Imputation ◽  
Real World ◽  
Missing Values ◽  
Total Error ◽  
Extensive Study ◽  
Error Measurement ◽  
Missing Data Imputation ◽  
Single Station ◽  
Real World Datasets

Reconstructing missing streamflow data can be challenging when additional data are not available, and missing data imputation of real-world datasets to investigate how to ascertain the accuracy of imputation algorithms for these datasets are lacking. This study investigated the necessary complexity of missing data reconstruction schemes to obtain the relevant results for a real-world single station streamflow observation to facilitate its further use. This investigation was implemented by applying different missing data mechanisms spanning from univariate algorithms to multiple imputation methods accustomed to multivariate data taking time as an explicit variable. The performance accuracy of these schemes was assessed using the total error measurement (TEM) and a recommended localized error measurement (LEM) in this study. The results show that univariate missing value algorithms, which are specially developed to handle univariate time series, provide satisfactory results, but the ones which provide the best results are usually time and computationally intensive. Also, multiple imputation algorithms which consider the surrounding observed values and/or which can understand the characteristics of the data provide similar results to the univariate missing data algorithms and, in some cases, perform better without the added time and computational downsides when time is taken as an explicit variable. Furthermore, the LEM would be especially useful when the missing data are in specific portions of the dataset or where very large gaps of ‘missingness’ occur. Finally, proper handling of missing values of real-world hydroclimatic datasets depends on imputing and extensive study of the particular dataset to be imputed.

scholarly journals SLE clinical trials: impact of missing data on estimating treatment effects

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. e000348 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mimi Kim ◽  
Joan T Merrill ◽  
Cuiling Wang ◽  
Shankar Viswanathan ◽  
Ken Kalunian ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Missing Data ◽  
Multiple Imputation ◽  
Treatment Effects ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Response Rates ◽  
Alternative Methods ◽  
Loss To Follow Up ◽  
Collective Data

ObjectiveA common problem in clinical trials is missing data due to participant dropout and loss to follow-up, an issue which continues to receive considerable attention in the clinical research community. Our objective was to examine and compare current and alternative methods for handling missing data in SLE trials with a particular focus on multiple imputation, a flexible technique that has been applied in different disease settings but not to address missing data in the primary outcome of an SLE trial.MethodsData on 279 patients with SLE randomised to standard of care (SoC) and also receiving mycophenolate mofetil (MMF), azathioprine or methotrexate were obtained from the Lupus Foundation of America-Collective Data Analysis Initiative Database. Complete case analysis (CC), last observation carried forward (LOCF), non-responder imputation (NRI) and multiple imputation (MI) were applied to handle missing data in an analysis to assess differences in SLE Responder Index-5 (SRI-5) response rates at 52 weeks between patients on SoC treated with MMF versus other immunosuppressants (non-MMF).ResultsThe rates of missing data were 32% in the MMF and 23% in the non-MMF groups. As expected, the NRI missing data approach yielded the lowest estimated response rates. The smallest and least significant estimates of differences between groups were observed with LOCF, and precision was lowest with the CC method. Estimated between-group differences were magnified with the MI approach, and imputing SRI-5 directly versus deriving SRI-5 after separately imputing its individual components yielded similar results.ConclusionThe potential advantages of applying MI to address missing data in an SLE trial include reduced bias when estimating treatment effects, and measures of precision that properly reflect uncertainty in the imputations. However, results can vary depending on the imputation model used, and the underlying assumptions should be plausible. Sensitivity analysis should be conducted to demonstrate robustness of results, especially when missing data proportions are high.

scholarly journals Multiple imputation in big identifiable data for educational research: An example from the Brazilian education assessment system

2020 ◽  
Vol 28 (108) ◽  
pp. 599-621
Author(s):  
Maria Eugénia Ferrão ◽  
Paula Prata ◽  
Maria Teresa Gonzaga Alves
Keyword(s):  
Missing Data ◽  
Multiple Imputation ◽  
Educational Research ◽  
Missing Values ◽  
Assessment System ◽  
Policy And Practice ◽  
Real World Data ◽  
Missing Completely At Random ◽  
Almost All ◽  
Identifiable Data

Abstract Almost all quantitative studies in educational assessment, evaluation and educational research are based on incomplete data sets, which have been a problem for years without a single solution. The use of big identifiable data poses new challenges in dealing with missing values. In the first part of this paper, we present the state-of-art of the topic in the Brazilian education scientific literature, and how researchers have dealt with missing data since the turn of the century. Next, we use open access software to analyze real-world data, the 2017 Prova Brasil , for several federation units to document how the naïve assumption of missing completely at random may substantially affect statistical conclusions, researcher interpretations, and subsequent implications for policy and practice. We conclude with straightforward suggestions for any education researcher on applying R routines to conduct the hypotheses test of missing completely at random and, if the null hypothesis is rejected, then how to implement the multiple imputation, which appears to be one of the most appropriate methods for handling missing data.

scholarly journals Comparison of Selected Multiple Imputation Methods for Continuous Variables – Preliminary Simulation Study Results

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (339) ◽  
pp. 73-98
Author(s):  
Małgorzata Aleksandra Misztal
Keyword(s):  
Missing Data ◽  
Multiple Imputation ◽  
Missing Values ◽  
Imputation Accuracy ◽  
Imputation Method ◽  
Data Sets ◽  
Continuous Variables ◽  
Imputation Methods ◽  
Study Results ◽  
Almost All

The problem of incomplete data and its implications for drawing valid conclusions from statistical analyses is not related to any particular scientific domain, it arises in economics, sociology, education, behavioural sciences or medicine. Almost all standard statistical methods presume that every object has information on every variable to be included in the analysis and the typical approach to missing data is simply to delete them. However, this leads to ineffective and biased analysis results and is not recommended in the literature. The state of the art technique for handling missing data is multiple imputation. In the paper, some selected multiple imputation methods were taken into account. Special attention was paid to using principal components analysis (PCA) as an imputation method. The goal of the study was to assess the quality of PCA‑based imputations as compared to two other multiple imputation techniques: multivariate imputation by chained equations (MICE) and missForest. The comparison was made by artificially simulating different proportions (10–50%) and mechanisms of missing data using 10 complete data sets from the UCI repository of machine learning databases. Then, missing values were imputed with the use of MICE, missForest and the PCA‑based method (MIPCA). The normalised root mean square error (NRMSE) was calculated as a measure of imputation accuracy. On the basis of the conducted analyses, missForest can be recommended as a multiple imputation method providing the lowest rates of imputation errors for all types of missingness. PCA‑based imputation does not perform well in terms of accuracy.

scholarly journals Data Missing Not at Random in Mobile Health Research: Assessment of the Problem and a Case for Sensitivity Analyses

10.2196/26749 ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (6) ◽  
pp. e26749
Author(s):  
Simon B Goldberg ◽  
Daniel M Bolt ◽  
Richard J Davidson
Keyword(s):  
Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Missing Data ◽  
Maximum Likelihood ◽  
Multiple Imputation ◽  
Mixture Model ◽  
Mobile Health ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Research Assessment ◽  
Missing Not At Random ◽  
Pattern Mixture Model

Background Missing data are common in mobile health (mHealth) research. There has been little systematic investigation of how missingness is handled statistically in mHealth randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Although some missing data patterns (ie, missing at random [MAR]) may be adequately addressed using modern missing data methods such as multiple imputation and maximum likelihood techniques, these methods do not address bias when data are missing not at random (MNAR). It is typically not possible to determine whether the missing data are MAR. However, higher attrition in active (ie, intervention) versus passive (ie, waitlist or no treatment) conditions in mHealth RCTs raise a strong likelihood of MNAR, such as if active participants who benefit less from the intervention are more likely to drop out. Objective This study aims to systematically evaluate differential attrition and methods used for handling missingness in a sample of mHealth RCTs comparing active and passive control conditions. We also aim to illustrate a modern model-based sensitivity analysis and a simpler fixed-value replacement approach that can be used to evaluate the influence of MNAR. Methods We reanalyzed attrition rates and predictors of differential attrition in a sample of 36 mHealth RCTs drawn from a recent meta-analysis of smartphone-based mental health interventions. We systematically evaluated the design features related to missingness and its handling. Data from a recent mHealth RCT were used to illustrate 2 sensitivity analysis approaches (pattern-mixture model and fixed-value replacement approach). Results Attrition in active conditions was, on average, roughly twice that of passive controls. Differential attrition was higher in larger studies and was associated with the use of MAR-based multiple imputation or maximum likelihood methods. Half of the studies (18/36, 50%) used these modern missing data techniques. None of the 36 mHealth RCTs reviewed conducted a sensitivity analysis to evaluate the possible consequences of data MNAR. A pattern-mixture model and fixed-value replacement sensitivity analysis approaches were introduced. Results from a recent mHealth RCT were shown to be robust to missing data, reflecting worse outcomes in missing versus nonmissing scores in some but not all scenarios. A review of such scenarios helps to qualify the observations of significant treatment effects. Conclusions MNAR data because of differential attrition are likely in mHealth RCTs using passive controls. Sensitivity analyses are recommended to allow researchers to assess the potential impact of MNAR on trial results.

Improvement of random forest by multiple imputation applied to tower crane accident prediction with missing data

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ling Jiang ◽  
Tingsheng Zhao ◽  
Chuxuan Feng ◽  
Wei Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Missing Data ◽  
Random Forest ◽  
Prediction Model ◽  
Multiple Imputation ◽  
Incomplete Data ◽  
Missing Values ◽  
Critical Factors ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Accident Prediction ◽  
Tower Crane

PurposeThis research is aimed at predicting tower crane accident phases with incomplete data.Design/methodology/approachThe tower crane accidents are collected for prediction model training. Random forest (RF) is used to conduct prediction. When there are missing values in the new inputs, they should be filled in advance. Nevertheless, it is difficult to collect complete data on construction site. Thus, the authors use multiple imputation (MI) method to improve RF. Finally the prediction model is applied to a case study.FindingsThe results show that multiple imputation RF (MIRF) can effectively predict tower crane accident when the data are incomplete. This research provides the importance rank of tower crane safety factors. The critical factors should be focused on site, because the missing data affect the prediction results seriously. Also the value of critical factors influences the safety of tower crane.Practical implicationThis research promotes the application of machine learning methods for accident prediction in actual projects. According to the onsite data, the authors can predict the accident phase of tower crane. The results can be used for tower crane accident prevention.Originality/valuePrevious studies have seldom predicted tower crane accidents, especially the phase of accident. This research uses tower crane data collected on site to predict the phase of the tower crane accident. The incomplete data collection is considered in this research according to the actual situation.

scholarly journals A Note on Listwise Deletion versus Multiple Imputation

2018 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 480-488 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas B. Pepinsky
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Imputation ◽  
Missing Values ◽  
Missing At Random ◽  
Strong Correlations ◽  
Simulation Approach ◽  
Missing Not At Random ◽  
Listwise Deletion ◽  
Data Generating Process

This letter compares the performance of multiple imputation and listwise deletion using a simulation approach. The focus is on data that are “missing not at random” (MNAR), in which case both multiple imputation and listwise deletion are known to be biased. In these simulations, multiple imputation yields results that are frequently more biased, less efficient, and with worse coverage than listwise deletion when data are MNAR. This is the case even with very strong correlations between fully observed variables and variables with missing values, such that the data are very nearly “missing at random.” These results recommend caution when comparing the results from multiple imputation and listwise deletion, when the true data generating process is unknown.

Analyzing Incomplete Political Science Data: An Alternative Algorithm for Multiple Imputation

2001 ◽  
Vol 95 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-69 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gary King ◽  
James Honaker ◽  
Anne Joseph ◽  
Kenneth Scheve
Keyword(s):  
Missing Data ◽  
Multiple Imputation ◽  
Missing Values ◽  
Simulated Data ◽  
General Purpose ◽  
Science Data ◽  
Data Practices ◽  
Dependent Variables ◽  
Superior Approach ◽  
Analyze Data

We propose a remedy for the discrepancy between the way political scientists analyze data with missing values and the recommendations of the statistics community. Methodologists and statisticians agree that “multiple imputation” is a superior approach to the problem of missing data scattered through one’s explanatory and dependent variables than the methods currently used in applied data analysis. The discrepancy occurs because the computational algorithms used to apply the best multiple imputation models have been slow, difficult to implement, impossible to run with existing commercial statistical packages, and have demanded considerable expertise. We adapt an algorithm and use it to implement a general-purpose, multiple imputation model for missing data. This algorithm is considerably faster and easier to use than the leading method recommended in the statistics literature. We also quantify the risks of current missing data practices, illustrate how to use the new procedure, and evaluate this alternative through simulated data as well as actual empirical examples. Finally, we offer easy-to-use software that implements all methods discussed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document