Steven Willem Joost Nijman1, T Katrien J Groenhof2, Jeroen Hoogland2, Michiel L Bots2, Menno Brandjes3, John J L Jacobs3, Folkert W Asselbergs4, Karel G M Moons2, Thomas P A Debray5. 1. Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands. Electronic address: s.w.j.nijman@umcutrecht.nl. 2. Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands. 3. LogiqCare, Ortec B.V., Zoetermeer, the Netherlands. 4. Division Heart & Lungs, Department of Cardiology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands; Institute of Cardiovascular Science, Faculty of Population Health Sciences, University College London, London, UK; Health Data Research UK, Institute of Health Informatics, University College London, London, UK. 5. Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands; Institute of Cardiovascular Science, Faculty of Population Health Sciences, University College London, London, UK.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: In clinical practice, many prediction models cannot be used when predictor values are missing. We, therefore, propose and evaluate methods for real-time imputation. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We describe (i) mean imputation (where missing values are replaced by the sample mean), (ii) joint modeling imputation (JMI, where we use a multivariate normal approximation to generate patient-specific imputations), and (iii) conditional modeling imputation (CMI, where a multivariable imputation model is derived for each predictor from a population). We compared these methods in a case study evaluating the root mean squared error (RMSE) and coverage of the 95% confidence intervals (i.e., the proportion of confidence intervals that contain the true predictor value) of imputed predictor values. RESULTS: -RMSE was lowest when adopting JMI or CMI, although imputation of individual predictors did not always lead to substantial improvements as compared to mean imputation. JMI and CMI appeared particularly useful when the values of multiple predictors of the model were missing. Coverage reached the nominal level (i.e., 95%) for both CMI and JMI. CONCLUSION: Multiple imputations using either CMI or JMI is recommended when dealing with missing predictor values in real-time settings.
OBJECTIVES: In clinical practice, many prediction models cannot be used when predictor values are missing. We, therefore, propose and evaluate methods for real-time imputation. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We describe (i) mean imputation (where missing values are replaced by the sample mean), (ii) joint modeling imputation (JMI, where we use a multivariate normal approximation to generate patient-specific imputations), and (iii) conditional modeling imputation (CMI, where a multivariable imputation model is derived for each predictor from a population). We compared these methods in a case study evaluating the root mean squared error (RMSE) and coverage of the 95% confidence intervals (i.e., the proportion of confidence intervals that contain the true predictor value) of imputed predictor values. RESULTS: -RMSE was lowest when adopting JMI or CMI, although imputation of individual predictors did not always lead to substantial improvements as compared to mean imputation. JMI and CMI appeared particularly useful when the values of multiple predictors of the model were missing. Coverage reached the nominal level (i.e., 95%) for both CMI and JMI. CONCLUSION: Multiple imputations using either CMI or JMI is recommended when dealing with missing predictor values in real-time settings.
Authors: Alexandria Ratzki-Leewing; Bridget L Ryan; Guangyong Zou; Susan Webster-Bogaert; Jason E Black; Kathryn Stirling; Kristina Timcevska; Nadia Khan; John D Buchenberger; Stewart B Harris Journal: JMIR Res Protoc Date: 2022-02-11
Authors: Matthias Neumair; Michael W Kattan; Stephen J Freedland; Alexander Haese; Lourdes Guerrios-Rivera; Amanda M De Hoedt; Michael A Liss; Robin J Leach; Stephen A Boorjian; Matthew R Cooperberg; Cedric Poyet; Karim Saba; Kathleen Herkommer; Valentin H Meissner; Andrew J Vickers; Donna P Ankerst Journal: BMC Med Res Methodol Date: 2022-07-21 Impact factor: 4.612