ArticleJournal of personalized medicine2024
Analysis of Missingness Scenarios for Observational Health Data.
Article in Journal of personalized medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Construction and external validation of a prognostic model for survival in hepatocellular carcinoma patients undergoing transarterial chemoembolization: a multicenter retrospective cohort study.World journal of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Cafe: Improved Federated Data Imputation by Leveraging Missing Data Heterogeneity.IEEE transactions on knowledge and data engineering · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Despite the extensive literature on missing data theory and cautionary articles emphasizing the importance of realistic analysis for healthcare data, a critical gap persists in incorporating domain knowledge into the missing data methods. In this paper, we argue that the remedy is to identify the key scenarios that lead to data missingness and investigate their theoretical implications. Based on this proposal, we first introduce an analysis framework where we investigate how different observation agents, such as physicians, influence the data availability and then scrutinize each scenario with respect to the steps in the missing data analysis. We apply this framework to the case study of observational data in healthcare facilities. We identify ten fundamental missingness scenarios and show how they influence the identification step for missing data graphical models, inverse probability weighting estimation, and exponential tilting sensitivity analysis. To emphasize how domain-informed analysis can improve method reliability, we conduct simulation studies under the influence of various missingness scenarios. We compare the results of three common methods in medical data analysis: complete-case analysis, Missforest imputation, and inverse probability weighting estimation. The experiments are conducted for two objectives: variable mean estimation and classification accuracy. We advocate for our analysis approach as a reference for the observational health data analysis. Beyond that, we also posit that the proposed analysis framework is applicable to other medical domains.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.