Multiple imputation for missing continuous and dichotomous data: The effects of patterns of missingness and variable correlations on type I error with small samples

The purpose of this study is to investigate the effects of predictor variable correlations and patterns of missingness with dichotomous and/or continuous data in small samples when missing data is multiply imputed. Missing data of predictor variables is multiply imputed under three different multivariate models: the multivariate normal model for continuous data, the multinomial model for dichotomous data and the general location model for mixed dichotomous and continuous data. Subsequent to the multiple imputation process, Type I error rates of the regression coefficients obtained with logistic regression analysis are estimated under various conditions of correlation structure, sample size, type of data and patterns of missing data. The distributional properties of average mean, variance and correlations among the predictor variables are assessed after the multiple imputation process. ^ For continuous predictor data under the multivariate normal model, Type I error rates are generally within the nominal values with samples of size n = 100. Smaller samples of size n = 50 resulted in more conservative estimates (i.e., lower than the nominal value). Correlation and variance estimates of the original data are retained after multiple imputation with less than 50% missing continuous predictor data. For dichotomous predictor data under the multinomial model, Type I error rates are generally conservative, which in part is due to the sparseness of the data. The correlation structure for the predictor variables is not well retained on multiply-imputed data from small samples with more than 50% missing data with this model. For mixed continuous and dichotomous predictor data, the results are similar to those found under the multivariate normal model for continuous data and under the multinomial model for dichotomous data. With all data types, a fully-observed variable included with variables subject to missingness in the multiple imputation process and subsequent statistical analysis provided liberal (larger than nominal values) Type I error rates under a specific pattern of missing data. It is suggested that future studies focus on the effects of multiple imputation in multivariate settings with more realistic data characteristics and a variety of multivariate analyses, assessing both Type I error and power. ^

Data Management Policies and Issues with Life Science Data

Data management and sharing are relatively new concepts in the health and life sciences fields. This presentation will cover some basic policies as well as the impediments to data sharing unique to health and life sciences data.

Application of the general linear model to assess the effect of missing data on bone marrow mononuclear cell therapy with infusion timing and follow-up MRI

With most clinical trials, missing data presents a statistical problem in evaluating a treatment's efficacy. There are many methods commonly used to assess missing data; however, these methods leave room for bias to enter the study. This thesis was a secondary analysis on data taken from TIME, a phase 2 randomized clinical trial conducted to evaluate the safety and effect of the administration timing of bone marrow mononuclear cells (BMMNC) for subjects with acute myocardial infarction (AMI).^ We evaluated the effect of missing data by comparing the variance inflation factor (VIF) of the effect of therapy between all subjects and only subjects with complete data. Through the general linear model, an unbiased solution was made for the VIF of the treatment's efficacy using the weighted least squares method to incorporate missing data. Two groups were identified from the TIME data: 1) all subjects and 2) subjects with complete data (baseline and follow-up measurements). After the general solution was found for the VIF, it was migrated Excel 2010 to evaluate data from TIME. The resulting numerical value from the two groups was compared to assess the effect of missing data.^ The VIF values from the TIME study were considerably less in the group with missing data. By design, we varied the correlation factor in order to evaluate the VIFs of both groups. As the correlation factor increased, the VIF values increased at a faster rate in the group with only complete data. Furthermore, while varying the correlation factor, the number of subjects with missing data was also varied to see how missing data affects the VIF. When subjects with only baseline data was increased, we saw a significant rate increase in VIF values in the group with only complete data while the group with missing data saw a steady and consistent increase in the VIF. The same was seen when we varied the group with follow-up only data. This essentially showed that the VIFs steadily increased when missing data is not ignored. When missing data is ignored as with our comparison group, the VIF values sharply increase as correlation increases.^

Data quality in trauma transfusion studies and the impact of missing data on predicting massive transfusion

Maximizing data quality may be especially difficult in trauma-related clinical research. Strategies are needed to improve data quality and assess the impact of data quality on clinical predictive models. This study had two objectives. The first was to compare missing data between two multi-center trauma transfusion studies: a retrospective study (RS) using medical chart data with minimal data quality review and the PRospective Observational Multi-center Major Trauma Transfusion (PROMMTT) study with standardized quality assurance. The second objective was to assess the impact of missing data on clinical prediction algorithms by evaluating blood transfusion prediction models using PROMMTT data. RS (2005-06) and PROMMTT (2009-10) investigated trauma patients receiving ≥ 1 unit of red blood cells (RBC) from ten Level I trauma centers. Missing data were compared for 33 variables collected in both studies using mixed effects logistic regression (including random intercepts for study site). Massive transfusion (MT) patients received ≥ 10 RBC units within 24h of admission. Correct classification percentages for three MT prediction models were evaluated using complete case analysis and multiple imputation based on the multivariate normal distribution. A sensitivity analysis for missing data was conducted to estimate the upper and lower bounds of correct classification using assumptions about missing data under best and worst case scenarios. Most variables (17/33=52%) had <1% missing data in RS and PROMMTT. Of the remaining variables, 50% demonstrated less missingness in PROMMTT, 25% had less missingness in RS, and 25% were similar between studies. Missing percentages for MT prediction variables in PROMMTT ranged from 2.2% (heart rate) to 45% (respiratory rate). For variables missing >1%, study site was associated with missingness (all p≤0.021). Survival time predicted missingness for 50% of RS and 60% of PROMMTT variables. MT models complete case proportions ranged from 41% to 88%. Complete case analysis and multiple imputation demonstrated similar correct classification results. Sensitivity analysis upper-lower bound ranges for the three MT models were 59-63%, 36-46%, and 46-58%. Prospective collection of ten-fold more variables with data quality assurance reduced overall missing data. Study site and patient survival were associated with missingness, suggesting that data were not missing completely at random, and complete case analysis may lead to biased results. Evaluating clinical prediction model accuracy may be misleading in the presence of missing data, especially with many predictor variables. The proposed sensitivity analysis estimating correct classification under upper (best case scenario)/lower (worst case scenario) bounds may be more informative than multiple imputation, which provided results similar to complete case analysis.^