Imputation-Based Variable Selection Method for Block-Wise Missing Data When Integrating Multiple Longitudinal Studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
When integrating data from multiple sources, a common challenge is block-wise missing. Most existing methods address this issue only in cross-sectional studies. In this paper, we propose a method for variable selection when combining datasets from multiple sources in longitudinal studies. To account for block-wise missing in covariates, we impute the missing values multiple times based on combinations of samples from different missing pattern and predictors from different data sources. We then use these imputed data to construct estimating equations, and aggregate the information across subjects and sources with the generalized method of moments. We employ the smoothly clipped absolute deviation penalty in variable selection and use the extended Bayesian Information Criterion criteria for tuning parameter selection. We establish the asymptotic properties of the proposed estimator, and demonstrate the superior performance of the proposed method through numerical experiments. Furthermore, we apply the proposed method in the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative study to identify sensitive early-stage biomarkers of Alzheimer's Disease, which is crucial for early disease detection and personalized treatment.
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 | 0.045 | 0.061 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".