Handling of missing component information for common composite score outcomes used in axial spondyloarthritis research when complete-case analysis is unbiased.

IF 3.4 3区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES BMC Medical Research Methodology Pub Date : 2025-02-28 DOI:10.1186/s12874-025-02515-3
Christos Polysopoulos, Stylianos Georgiadis, Lykke Midtbøll Ørnbjerg, Almut Scherer, Daniela Di Giuseppe, Merete Lund Hetland, Michael John Nissen, Gareth T Jones, Bente Glintborg, Anne Gitte Loft, Johan Karlsson Wallman, Karel Pavelka, Jakub Závada, Ayten Yazici, Maria José Santos, Adrian Ciurea, Burkhard Möller, Brigitte Michelsen, Pawel Mielnik, Johanna Huhtakangas, Heikki Relas, Katja Perdan Pirkmajer, Ziga Rotar, Ross MacDonald, Bjorn Gudbjornsson, Irene van der Horst-Bruinsma, Marleen van de Sande, Myriam Riek
{"title":"Handling of missing component information for common composite score outcomes used in axial spondyloarthritis research when complete-case analysis is unbiased.","authors":"Christos Polysopoulos, Stylianos Georgiadis, Lykke Midtbøll Ørnbjerg, Almut Scherer, Daniela Di Giuseppe, Merete Lund Hetland, Michael John Nissen, Gareth T Jones, Bente Glintborg, Anne Gitte Loft, Johan Karlsson Wallman, Karel Pavelka, Jakub Závada, Ayten Yazici, Maria José Santos, Adrian Ciurea, Burkhard Möller, Brigitte Michelsen, Pawel Mielnik, Johanna Huhtakangas, Heikki Relas, Katja Perdan Pirkmajer, Ziga Rotar, Ross MacDonald, Bjorn Gudbjornsson, Irene van der Horst-Bruinsma, Marleen van de Sande, Myriam Riek","doi":"10.1186/s12874-025-02515-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Observational data on composite scores often comes with missing component information. When a complete-case (CC) analysis of composite scores is unbiased, preferable approaches of dealing with missing component information should also be unbiased and provide a more precise estimate. We assessed the performance of several methods compared to CC analysis in estimating the means of common composite scores used in axial spondyloarthritis research.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Individual mean imputation (IMI), the modified formula method (MF), overall mean imputation (OMI), and multiple imputation of missing component values (MI) were assessed either analytically or by means of simulations from available data collected across Europe. Their performance in estimating the means of the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI), the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (BASFI), and the Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score based on C-reactive protein (ASDAS-CRP) in cases where component information was set missing completely at random was compared to the CC approach based on bias, variance, and coverage.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Like the MF method, IMI uses a modified formula for observations with missing components resulting in modified composite scores. In the case of an unbiased CC approach, these two methods yielded representative samples of the distribution arising from a mixture of the original and modified composite scores, which, however, could not be considered the same as the distribution of the original score. The IMI and MF method are, thus, intrinsically biased. OMI provided an unbiased mean but displayed a complex dependence structure among observations that, if not accounted for, resulted in severe coverage issues. MI improved precision compared to CC and gave unbiased means and proper coverage as long as the extent of missingness was not too large.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>MI of missing component values was the only method found successful in retaining CC's unbiasedness and in providing increased precision for estimating the means of BASDAI, BASFI, and ASDAS-CRP. However, since MI is susceptible to incorrect implementation and its performance may become questionable with increasing missingness, we consider the implementation of an error-free CC approach a valid and valuable option.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>Not applicable as study uses data from patient registries.</p>","PeriodicalId":9114,"journal":{"name":"BMC Medical Research Methodology","volume":"25 1","pages":"55"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11869558/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Medical Research Methodology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-025-02515-3","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Observational data on composite scores often comes with missing component information. When a complete-case (CC) analysis of composite scores is unbiased, preferable approaches of dealing with missing component information should also be unbiased and provide a more precise estimate. We assessed the performance of several methods compared to CC analysis in estimating the means of common composite scores used in axial spondyloarthritis research.

Methods: Individual mean imputation (IMI), the modified formula method (MF), overall mean imputation (OMI), and multiple imputation of missing component values (MI) were assessed either analytically or by means of simulations from available data collected across Europe. Their performance in estimating the means of the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI), the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (BASFI), and the Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score based on C-reactive protein (ASDAS-CRP) in cases where component information was set missing completely at random was compared to the CC approach based on bias, variance, and coverage.

Results: Like the MF method, IMI uses a modified formula for observations with missing components resulting in modified composite scores. In the case of an unbiased CC approach, these two methods yielded representative samples of the distribution arising from a mixture of the original and modified composite scores, which, however, could not be considered the same as the distribution of the original score. The IMI and MF method are, thus, intrinsically biased. OMI provided an unbiased mean but displayed a complex dependence structure among observations that, if not accounted for, resulted in severe coverage issues. MI improved precision compared to CC and gave unbiased means and proper coverage as long as the extent of missingness was not too large.

Conclusions: MI of missing component values was the only method found successful in retaining CC's unbiasedness and in providing increased precision for estimating the means of BASDAI, BASFI, and ASDAS-CRP. However, since MI is susceptible to incorrect implementation and its performance may become questionable with increasing missingness, we consider the implementation of an error-free CC approach a valid and valuable option.

Trial registration: Not applicable as study uses data from patient registries.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在完整病例分析无偏见的情况下,处理轴性脊柱关节炎研究中使用的常见综合评分结果的缺失部分信息。
背景:综合得分的观察数据往往缺少成分信息。当复合分数的完全情况(CC)分析是无偏的,处理缺失成分信息的首选方法也应该是无偏的,并提供更精确的估计。与CC分析相比,我们评估了几种方法在估计轴性脊柱性关节炎研究中常用综合评分平均值方面的表现。方法:从欧洲各地收集的现有数据中,通过分析或模拟的方式评估个体平均归算(IMI)、修正公式法(MF)、总体平均归算(OMI)和缺失成分值的多重归算(MI)。在随机设置成分信息完全缺失的情况下,他们在估计巴斯强直性脊柱炎疾病活动指数(BASDAI)、巴斯强直性脊柱炎功能指数(BASFI)和基于c反应蛋白(ASDAS-CRP)的强直性脊柱炎疾病活动评分的平均值方面的表现与基于偏倚、方差和覆盖率的CC方法进行比较。结果:与MF方法一样,IMI使用修改的公式来处理缺失成分的观测结果,从而得到修改的综合分数。在无偏CC方法的情况下,这两种方法产生了由原始和修改后的复合分数混合产生的分布的代表性样本,然而,这不能被认为与原始分数的分布相同。因此,IMI和MF方法在本质上是有偏差的。OMI提供了无偏平均值,但在观察结果之间显示出复杂的依赖结构,如果不加以解释,将导致严重的覆盖问题。与CC相比,MI提高了精度,只要缺失程度不太大,MI就会给出无偏均值和适当的覆盖范围。结论:缺失成分值的MI是唯一成功保持CC无偏性的方法,并为估计BASDAI、BASFI和ASDAS-CRP的平均值提供了更高的精度。然而,由于MI容易受到错误实现的影响,并且随着丢失的增加,其性能可能会受到质疑,因此我们认为实现无错误CC方法是一种有效且有价值的选择。试验注册:不适用,因为研究使用的数据来自患者注册。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
BMC Medical Research Methodology
BMC Medical Research Methodology 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
2.50%
发文量
298
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Medical Research Methodology is an open access journal publishing original peer-reviewed research articles in methodological approaches to healthcare research. Articles on the methodology of epidemiological research, clinical trials and meta-analysis/systematic review are particularly encouraged, as are empirical studies of the associations between choice of methodology and study outcomes. BMC Medical Research Methodology does not aim to publish articles describing scientific methods or techniques: these should be directed to the BMC journal covering the relevant biomedical subject area.
期刊最新文献
Joint modelling on clinical trials in clinical journals: a systematic review. Innovative statistical method for longitudinal and hierarchical data modeling: the GMEXGBoost method. Theory in qualitative research: a qualitative study of research experts' views. Individual-centric N-of-1 trials: a case study assessing the effect of alcohol abstinence on mood levels. Cluster minimal sufficient balance (CMSB): an efficient covariate balancing randomization method for cluster randomized trials.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1