Cargando…
What difference does multiple imputation make in longitudinal modeling of EQ-5D-5L data? Empirical analyses of simulated and observed missing data patterns
PURPOSE: Although multiple imputation is the state-of-the-art method for managing missing data, mixed models without multiple imputation may be equally valid for longitudinal data. Additionally, it is not clear whether missing values in multi-item instruments should be imputed at item or score-level...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer International Publishing
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9023409/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34797507 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11136-021-03037-3 |
_version_ | 1784690343104479232 |
---|---|
author | Rösel, Inka Serna-Higuita, Lina María Al Sayah, Fatima Buchholz, Maresa Buchholz, Ines Kohlmann, Thomas Martus, Peter Feng, You-Shan |
author_facet | Rösel, Inka Serna-Higuita, Lina María Al Sayah, Fatima Buchholz, Maresa Buchholz, Ines Kohlmann, Thomas Martus, Peter Feng, You-Shan |
author_sort | Rösel, Inka |
collection | PubMed |
description | PURPOSE: Although multiple imputation is the state-of-the-art method for managing missing data, mixed models without multiple imputation may be equally valid for longitudinal data. Additionally, it is not clear whether missing values in multi-item instruments should be imputed at item or score-level. We therefore explored the differences in analyzing the scores of a health-related quality of life questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L) using four approaches in two empirical datasets. METHODS: We used simulated (GR dataset) and observed missingness patterns (ABCD dataset) in EQ-5D-5L scores to investigate the following approaches: approach-1) mixed models using respondents with complete cases, approach-2) mixed models using all available data, approach-3) mixed models after multiple imputation of the EQ-5D-5L scores, and approach-4) mixed models after multiple imputation of EQ-5D 5L items. RESULTS: Approach-1 yielded the highest estimates of all approaches (ABCD, GR), increasingly overestimating the EQ-5D-5L score with higher percentages of missing data (GR). Approach-4 produced the lowest scores at follow-up evaluations (ABCD, GR). Standard errors (0.006–0.008) and mean squared errors (0.032–0.035) increased with increasing percentages of simulated missing GR data. Approaches 2 and 3 showed similar results (both datasets). CONCLUSION: Complete cases analyses overestimated the scores and mixed models after multiple imputation by items yielded the lowest scores. As there was no loss of accuracy, mixed models without multiple imputation, when baseline covariates are complete, might be the most parsimonious choice to deal with missing data. However, multiple imputation may be needed when baseline covariates are missing and/or more than two timepoints are considered. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11136-021-03037-3. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9023409 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Springer International Publishing |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-90234092022-05-06 What difference does multiple imputation make in longitudinal modeling of EQ-5D-5L data? Empirical analyses of simulated and observed missing data patterns Rösel, Inka Serna-Higuita, Lina María Al Sayah, Fatima Buchholz, Maresa Buchholz, Ines Kohlmann, Thomas Martus, Peter Feng, You-Shan Qual Life Res Article PURPOSE: Although multiple imputation is the state-of-the-art method for managing missing data, mixed models without multiple imputation may be equally valid for longitudinal data. Additionally, it is not clear whether missing values in multi-item instruments should be imputed at item or score-level. We therefore explored the differences in analyzing the scores of a health-related quality of life questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L) using four approaches in two empirical datasets. METHODS: We used simulated (GR dataset) and observed missingness patterns (ABCD dataset) in EQ-5D-5L scores to investigate the following approaches: approach-1) mixed models using respondents with complete cases, approach-2) mixed models using all available data, approach-3) mixed models after multiple imputation of the EQ-5D-5L scores, and approach-4) mixed models after multiple imputation of EQ-5D 5L items. RESULTS: Approach-1 yielded the highest estimates of all approaches (ABCD, GR), increasingly overestimating the EQ-5D-5L score with higher percentages of missing data (GR). Approach-4 produced the lowest scores at follow-up evaluations (ABCD, GR). Standard errors (0.006–0.008) and mean squared errors (0.032–0.035) increased with increasing percentages of simulated missing GR data. Approaches 2 and 3 showed similar results (both datasets). CONCLUSION: Complete cases analyses overestimated the scores and mixed models after multiple imputation by items yielded the lowest scores. As there was no loss of accuracy, mixed models without multiple imputation, when baseline covariates are complete, might be the most parsimonious choice to deal with missing data. However, multiple imputation may be needed when baseline covariates are missing and/or more than two timepoints are considered. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11136-021-03037-3. Springer International Publishing 2021-11-19 2022 /pmc/articles/PMC9023409/ /pubmed/34797507 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11136-021-03037-3 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Article Rösel, Inka Serna-Higuita, Lina María Al Sayah, Fatima Buchholz, Maresa Buchholz, Ines Kohlmann, Thomas Martus, Peter Feng, You-Shan What difference does multiple imputation make in longitudinal modeling of EQ-5D-5L data? Empirical analyses of simulated and observed missing data patterns |
title | What difference does multiple imputation make in longitudinal modeling of EQ-5D-5L data? Empirical analyses of simulated and observed missing data patterns |
title_full | What difference does multiple imputation make in longitudinal modeling of EQ-5D-5L data? Empirical analyses of simulated and observed missing data patterns |
title_fullStr | What difference does multiple imputation make in longitudinal modeling of EQ-5D-5L data? Empirical analyses of simulated and observed missing data patterns |
title_full_unstemmed | What difference does multiple imputation make in longitudinal modeling of EQ-5D-5L data? Empirical analyses of simulated and observed missing data patterns |
title_short | What difference does multiple imputation make in longitudinal modeling of EQ-5D-5L data? Empirical analyses of simulated and observed missing data patterns |
title_sort | what difference does multiple imputation make in longitudinal modeling of eq-5d-5l data? empirical analyses of simulated and observed missing data patterns |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9023409/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34797507 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11136-021-03037-3 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT roselinka whatdifferencedoesmultipleimputationmakeinlongitudinalmodelingofeq5d5ldataempiricalanalysesofsimulatedandobservedmissingdatapatterns AT sernahiguitalinamaria whatdifferencedoesmultipleimputationmakeinlongitudinalmodelingofeq5d5ldataempiricalanalysesofsimulatedandobservedmissingdatapatterns AT alsayahfatima whatdifferencedoesmultipleimputationmakeinlongitudinalmodelingofeq5d5ldataempiricalanalysesofsimulatedandobservedmissingdatapatterns AT buchholzmaresa whatdifferencedoesmultipleimputationmakeinlongitudinalmodelingofeq5d5ldataempiricalanalysesofsimulatedandobservedmissingdatapatterns AT buchholzines whatdifferencedoesmultipleimputationmakeinlongitudinalmodelingofeq5d5ldataempiricalanalysesofsimulatedandobservedmissingdatapatterns AT kohlmannthomas whatdifferencedoesmultipleimputationmakeinlongitudinalmodelingofeq5d5ldataempiricalanalysesofsimulatedandobservedmissingdatapatterns AT martuspeter whatdifferencedoesmultipleimputationmakeinlongitudinalmodelingofeq5d5ldataempiricalanalysesofsimulatedandobservedmissingdatapatterns AT fengyoushan whatdifferencedoesmultipleimputationmakeinlongitudinalmodelingofeq5d5ldataempiricalanalysesofsimulatedandobservedmissingdatapatterns |