
pmid: 33470157
In medical research, missing data is common. In acute diseases, such as traumatic brain injury (TBI), even well-conducted prospective studies may suffer from missing data in baseline characteristics and outcomes. Statistical models may simply drop patients with any missing values, potentially leaving a selected subset of the original cohort. Imputation is widely accepted by methodologists as an appropriate way to deal with missing data. We aim to provide practical guidance on handling missing data for prediction modeling. We hereto propose a five-step approach, centered around single and multiple imputation: 1) explore the missing data patterns; 2) choose a method of imputation; 3) perform imputation; 4) assess diagnostics of the imputation; and 5) analyze the imputed data sets. We illustrate these five steps with the estimation and validation of the IMPACT (International Mission on Prognosis and Analysis of Clinical Trials in Traumatic Brain Injury) prognostic model in 1375 patients from the CENTER-TBI database, included in 53 centers across 17 countries, with moderate or severe TBI in the prospective European CENTER-TBI study. Future prediction modeling studies in acute diseases may benefit from following the suggested five steps for optimal statistical analysis and interpretation, after maximal effort has been made to minimize missing data.
Brain Injuries, Traumatic/diagnosis/epidemiology, EXTERNAL VALIDATION, Neurosurgery - Radboud University Medical Center, Data Interpretation, PROGNOSIS, Biomedical Research, Databases, Factual, IMPACT, MULTICENTER, imputation, 551, Biomedical Research/methods, Cohort Studies, missing data, tutorial, Traumatic brain injury, Brain Injuries, Traumatic, Prospective Studies, Human health sciences, Biomedical Research/methods/statistics & numerical data, traumatic brain injury, Statistical, Databases, Factual/statistics & numerical data, Prognosis, Europe, BIAS, Data Interpretation, Statistical, Radboudumc 10: Reconstructive and regenerative medicine RIHS: Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, EFFICIENCY, 330, Missing data, MODELS, TRAUMATIC BRAIN-INJURY, Sciences de la santé humaine, Europe/epidemiology, Databases, Factual/statistics & numerical data, REGRESSION, Tutorial, Humans, Traumatic/diagnosis, Imputation, prediction, imputation; missing data; prediction; traumatic brain injury; tutorial;, Brain Injuries, MODERATE, Prediction, [SDV.MHEP]Life Sciences [q-bio]/Human health and pathology
Brain Injuries, Traumatic/diagnosis/epidemiology, EXTERNAL VALIDATION, Neurosurgery - Radboud University Medical Center, Data Interpretation, PROGNOSIS, Biomedical Research, Databases, Factual, IMPACT, MULTICENTER, imputation, 551, Biomedical Research/methods, Cohort Studies, missing data, tutorial, Traumatic brain injury, Brain Injuries, Traumatic, Prospective Studies, Human health sciences, Biomedical Research/methods/statistics & numerical data, traumatic brain injury, Statistical, Databases, Factual/statistics & numerical data, Prognosis, Europe, BIAS, Data Interpretation, Statistical, Radboudumc 10: Reconstructive and regenerative medicine RIHS: Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, EFFICIENCY, 330, Missing data, MODELS, TRAUMATIC BRAIN-INJURY, Sciences de la santé humaine, Europe/epidemiology, Databases, Factual/statistics & numerical data, REGRESSION, Tutorial, Humans, Traumatic/diagnosis, Imputation, prediction, imputation; missing data; prediction; traumatic brain injury; tutorial;, Brain Injuries, MODERATE, Prediction, [SDV.MHEP]Life Sciences [q-bio]/Human health and pathology
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 27 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
