MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4253069444 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-422960/v1

Addressing missing values in routine health information system data: an evaluation of imputation methods using data from the Democratic Republic of the Congo during the COVID-19 pandemic

2021· preprint· en· W4253069444 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Shuo Feng, Celestin Hategeka, Karen A. Grépin

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicCOVID-19 epidemiological studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsImputation (statistics)Missing dataPandemicCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)DemocracyGeographyStatisticsData miningPolitical scienceComputer scienceMedicineMathematicsInfectious disease (medical specialty)Politics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background : Poor data quality is limiting the greater use of data sourced from routine health information systems (RHIS), especially in low and middle-income countries. An important part of this issue comes from missing values, where health facilities, for a variety of reasons, miss their reports into the central system. Methods : Using data from the Health Management Information System (HMIS) and the advent of COVID-19 pandemic in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) as an illustrative case study, we implemented six commonly-used imputation methods using the DRC’s HMIS datasets and evaluated their performance through various statistical techniques, i.e., simple linear regression, segmented regression which is widely used in interrupted time series studies, and parametric comparisons through t-tests and non-parametric comparisons through Wilcoxon Rank-Sum tests. We also examined the performance of these six imputation methods under different missing mechanisms and tested their stability to changes in the data. Results : For regression analyses, there was no substantial difference found in the results generated from all methods except mean imputation and exclusion & interpolation when the RHIS dataset contained less than 20% missing values. However, as the missing proportion grew, machine learning methods such as missForest and k -NN started to produce biased estimates, and they were found to be also lack of robustness to minimal changes in data or to consecutive missingness. On the other hand, multiple imputation generated the overall most unbiased estimates and was the most robust to all changes in data. For comparing group means through t-tests, the results from mean imputation and exclusion & interpolation disagreed with the true inference obtained using the complete data, suggesting that these two methods would not only lead to biased regression estimates but also generate unreliable t-test results. Conclusions : We recommend the use of multiple imputation in addressing missing values in RHIS datasets. In cases necessary computing resources are unavailable to multiple imputation, one may consider seasonal decomposition as the next best method. Mean imputation and exclusion & interpolation, however, always produced biased and misleading results in the subsequent analyses, and thus their use in the handling of missing values should be discouraged. Keywords : Missing Data; Routine Health Information Systems (RHIS); Health Management Information System (HMIS); Health Services Research; Low and middle-income countries (LMICs); Multiple imputation

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.062
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.108
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.062
Threshold uncertainty score0.326

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0620.108
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.890
GPT teacher head0.674
Teacher spread0.217 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch Square→Same topicCOVID-19 epidemiological studies→French-language works237,207→