ArticleJournal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD2024
Improving Regression Analysis with Imputation in a Longitudinal Study of Alzheimer's Disease.
Article in Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- AD-related plasma biomarkers in centenarians: links to cognition and neuropathology.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2025Article
- Amyloid-Beta Pathology and Cognitive Performance in Centenarians.JAMA neurology · 2025Article
- Autoencoder imputation of missing heterogeneous data for Alzheimer's disease classification.Healthcare technology letters · 2024Article
- Longitudinal sleep duration patterns and their association with cognitive decline in older Chinese adults.Alzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Missing data is prevalent in the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI). It is common to deal with missingness by removing subjects with missing entries prior to statistical analysis; however, this can lead to significant efficiency loss and sometimes bias. It has yet to be demonstrated that the imputation approach to handling this issue can be valuable in some longitudinal regression settings. Objective: The purpose of this study is to demonstrate the importance of imputation and how imputation is correctly done in ADNI by analyzing longitudinal Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale -Cognitive Subscale 13 (ADAS-Cog 13) scores and their association with baseline patient characteristics. Methods: We studied 1,063 subjects in ADNI with mild cognitive impairment. Longitudinal ADAS-Cog 13 scores were modeled with a linear mixed-effects model with baseline clinical and demographic characteristics as predictors. The model estimates obtained without imputation were compared with those obtained after imputation with Multiple Imputation by Chained Equations (MICE). We justify application of MICE by investigating the missing data mechanism and model assumptions. We also assess robustness of the results to the choice of imputation method. Results: The fixed-effects estimates of the linear mixed-effects model after imputation with MICE yield valid, tighter confidence intervals, thus improving the efficiency of the analysis when compared to the analysis done without imputation. Conclusions: Our study demonstrates the importance of accounting for missing data in ADNI. When deciding to perform imputation, care should be taken in choosing the approach, as an invalid one can compromise the statistical analyses.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.