Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35369872›Full record

ArticleBMC medical research methodology2022

Comparing single and multiple imputation strategies for harmonizing substance use data across HIV-related cohort studies.

Marjan Javanbakht, Johnny Lin, Amy Ragsdale, Soyeon Kim, Suzanne Siminski, Pamina Gorbach

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
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

6 authors.

Marjan JavanbakhtDepartment of Epidemiology, Fielding School of Public Health, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA. javan@g.ucla.edu.
Johnny LinStatistical Methods and Data Analytics, Office of Advanced Research Computing, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Amy RagsdaleDepartment of Epidemiology, Fielding School of Public Health, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Soyeon KimFrontier Science Foundation, Brookline, MA, USA.
Suzanne SiminskiFrontier Science Foundation, Brookline, MA, USA.
Pamina GorbachDepartment of Epidemiology, Fielding School of Public Health, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA.

Funding

MSM and Substances Cohort at UCLA Linking Infections Noting Effects (MASCULINE) U01DA036267 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES · PI GORBACH, PAMINA MAE, SHOPTAW, STEVEN J · 2013 to 2024
$20.5M
Collaborating Consortium of Cohorts Producing NIDA Opportunities (C3PNO) Second Bridge Funding SupplementU24DA044554 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES · PI GORBACH, PAMINA MAE, SIMINSKI, SUZANNE M. · 2017 to 2022
$6.8M
NIDA NIH HHS U01 DA036267NIDA NIH HHS U24 DA044554
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough standardized measures to assess substance use are available, most studies use variations of these measures making it challenging to harmonize data across studies. The aim of this study was to evaluate the performance of different strategies to impute missing substance use data that may result as part of data harmonization procedures.

methodsWe used self-reported substance use data collected between August 2014 and June 2019 from 528 participants with 2,389 study visits in a cohort study of substance use and HIV. We selected a low (heroin), medium (methamphetamine), and high (cannabis) prevalence drug and set 10-50% of each substance to missing. The data amputation mimicked missingness that results from harmonization of disparate measures. We conducted Monte Carlo simulations to evaluate the comparative performance of single and multiple imputation (MI) methods using the relative mean bias, root mean square error (RMSE), and coverage probability of the 95% confidence interval for each imputed estimate.

resultsWithout imputation (i.e., listwise deletion), estimates of substance use were biased, especially for low prevalence outcomes such as heroin. For instance, even when 10% of data were missing, the complete case analysis underestimated the prevalence of heroin by 33%. MI, even with as few as five imputations produced the least biased estimates, however, for a high prevalence outcome such as cannabis with low to moderate missingness, performance of single imputation strategies improved. For instance, in the case of cannabis, with 10% missingness, single imputation with regression performed just as well as multiple imputation resulting in minimal bias (relative mean bias of 0.06% and 0.07% respectively) and comparable performance (RMSE = 0.0102 for both and coverage of 95.8% and 96.2% respectively).

conclusionOur results from imputation of missing substance use data resulting from data harmonization indicate that MI provided the best performance across a range of conditions. Additionally, single imputation for substance use data performed comparably under scenarios where the prevalence of the outcome was high and missingness was low. These findings provide a practical application for the evaluation of several imputation strategies and helps to address missing data problem when combining data from individual studies.

Indexed as

HIV InfectionsSubstance-Related DisordersBiasCohort StudiesData Interpretation, StatisticalHumans

Identifiers

PMID35369872
PMCPMC8978400

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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 OpenQuestion graph.