ArticlePloS one2024
A new method based on physical patterns to impute aerobiological datasets.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Limited research has assessed the accuracy of imputation methods in aerobiological datasets. We conducted a simulation study to evaluate, for the first time, the effectiveness of Gappy Singular Value Decomposition (GSVD), a data-driven approach, comparing it with the moving mean interpolation, a statistical approach. Utilizing complete pollen data from two monitoring stations in northeastern Italy for 2022, we randomly generated missing data considering the combination of various proportions (5%, 10%, 25%) and gap lengths (3, 5, 7, 10 days). We imputed 4800 time series using the GSVD algorithm, specifically implemented for this study, and the moving mean algorithm of the "AeRobiology" R package. We assessed imputation accuracy by calculating the Root Mean Square Error and employed multiple linear regression models to identify factors independently affecting the error (e.g. pollen variability, simulation settings). The results showed that the GSVD was as good as the well-established moving mean method and demonstrated its strong generalization capabilities across different data types. However, the imputation error was primarily influenced by pollen characteristics and location, regardless of the imputation method used. High variability in pollen concentrations and the distribution of missing data negatively affected imputation accuracy. In conclusion, we introduced and tested a novel imputation method, demonstrating comparable performance to the statistical approach in aerobiological data reconstruction. These findings contribute to advancing aerobiological data analysis, highlighting the need for improving imputation methods.
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.