IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0335852.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluation of imputation strategies for multi-centre studies: Application to a large clinical pathology dataset

Author

Listed:
  • Lucy Grigoroff
  • Reika Masuda
  • John Lindon
  • Janonna Kadyrov
  • Jeremy K Nicholson
  • Elaine Holmes
  • Julien Wist

Abstract

As part of a strategy for accommodating missing data in large heterogeneous datasets, two Random Forest-based (RF) imputation methods, missForest and MICE were evaluated along with several strategies to help navigate the inherently incomplete structure of the dataset. Background: A total of 3817 complete cases of clinical chemistry variables from a large-scale, multi-site preclinical longitudinal pathology study were used as an evaluation dataset. Three types of ‘missingness’ in various proportions were artificially introduced to compare imputation performance for different strategies including variable inclusion and stratification. Results: MissForest was found to outperform MICE, being robust and capable of automatic variable selection. Stratification had minimal effect on missForest but severely deteriorated the performance of MICE. Conclusion: In general, storing and sharing datasets prior to any correction is a good practise, so that imputation can be performed on merged data if necessary.

Suggested Citation

  • Lucy Grigoroff & Reika Masuda & John Lindon & Janonna Kadyrov & Jeremy K Nicholson & Elaine Holmes & Julien Wist, 2025. "Evaluation of imputation strategies for multi-centre studies: Application to a large clinical pathology dataset," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 20(11), pages 1-15, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0335852
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0335852
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0335852
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0335852&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0335852?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0335852. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.