Prediction Model Performance With Different Imputation Strategies: A Simulation Study Using a North American ICU Registry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the performance of pragmatic imputation approaches when estimating model coefficients using datasets with varying degrees of data missingness. DESIGN: Performance in predicting observed mortality in a registry dataset was evaluated using simulations of two simple logistic regression models with age-specific criteria for abnormal vital signs (mentation, systolic blood pressure, respiratory rate, WBC count, heart rate, and temperature). Starting with a dataset with complete information, increasing degrees of biased missingness of WBC and mentation were introduced, depending on the values of temperature and systolic blood pressure, respectively. Missing data approaches evaluated included analysis of complete cases only, assuming missing data are normal, and multiple imputation by chained equations. Percent bias and root mean square error, in relation to parameter estimates obtained from the original data, were evaluated as performance indicators. SETTING: Data were obtained from the Virtual Pediatric Systems, LLC, database (Los Angeles, CA), which provides clinical markers and outcomes in prospectively collected records from 117 PICUs in the United States and Canada. PATIENTS: Children admitted to a participating PICU in 2017, for whom all required data were available. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Simulations demonstrated that multiple imputation by chained equations is an effective strategy and that even a naive implementation of multiple imputation by chained equations significantly outperforms traditional approaches: the root mean square error for model coefficients was lower using multiple imputation by chained equations in 90 of 99 of all simulations (91%) compared with discarding cases with missing data and lower in 97 of 99 (98%) compared with models assuming missing values are in the normal range. Assuming missing data to be abnormal was inferior to all other approaches. CONCLUSIONS: Analyses of large observational studies are likely to encounter the issue of missing data, which are likely not missing at random. Researchers should always consider multiple imputation by chained equations (or similar imputation approaches) when encountering even only small proportions of missing data in their work.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.031 | 0.056 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".