Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40407109›Full record

ArticleStatistics in medicine2025

Weighted Repeated Measures Correlation Coefficient: A New Correlation Coefficient for Handling Missing Data With Repeated Measures.

Masahiro Kondo, Kengo Nagashima, Shiroh Isono, Yasunori Sato

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Statistics in medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Masahiro KondoGraduate School of Health Management, Keio University, Kanagawa, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4647-3746
Kengo NagashimaBiostatistics Unit, Clinical and Translational Research Center, Keio University Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4529-9045
Shiroh IsonoDivision of Respiratory Molecular Medicine, Medical Mycology Research Center, Chiba University, Chiba, Japan.
Yasunori SatoDepartment of Biostatistics, Keio University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The relationship between two variables measured multiple times per individual has often been evaluated in clinical studies. These data are not independent; therefore, the Pearson correlation coefficient is inappropriate, and some correlation coefficients for these data have been proposed. However, in the presence of missing data, the existing methods can be biased. In this article, we proposed a weighted repeated measures correlation coefficient that provides an accurate estimate, even with missing data, in a study in which participants ideally have the same number of measurements. We also provided a bootstrap confidence interval for the weighted repeated measures correlation coefficients. We evaluated the performance of the proposed and existing methods (i.e., simple Pearson correlation coefficient, the Pearson correlation coefficient for average, average of the Pearson correlation coefficient, correlation coefficient based on analysis of covariance, and correlation coefficient based on the linear mixed-effects model) through simulations and application to actual data. In numerical evaluations using simulations, the proposed method consistently outperformed existing methods. We recommend using a weighted repeated measures correlation coefficient to handle missing values in multiple-measurement data.

Indexed as

Correlation of DataModels, StatisticalComputer SimulationConfidence IntervalsData Interpretation, StatisticalHumansLinear Modelscorrelationmissing datarepeated measures

Identifiers

PMID40407109
PMCPMC12100710

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.