ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2025
Machine Learning for Missing Data Imputation in Alzheimer's Research: Predicting Medial Temporal Lobe Flexibility.
Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2025. 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
- Updated by
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAlzheimer's disease (AD) begins years before symptoms appear, making early detection essential. The medial temporal lobe (MTL) is one of the earliest regions affected, and its network flexibility, a dynamic measure of brain connectivity, may serve as a sensitive biomarker of early decline. Cognitive (acquisition, generalization), genetic (APOE, ABCA7), and biochemical (P-tau217) markers may predict MTL dynamic flexibility. Given the high rate of missing data in AD research, this study uses machine learning with advanced imputation methods to predict MTL dynamic flexibility from multimodal predictors in an aging cohort.
methodsIn an ongoing study at Rutgers's Aging and Brain Health Alliance, data from 656 participants are utilized, including cognitive assessments, genetic and blood-derived biomarkers, and demographics. Due to MRI-related constraints, only 34.15% of participants had measurable MTL dynamic flexibility from resting-state fMRI. To estimate MTL dynamic flexibility from available data, we evaluated four missing data handling methods (case deletion, MICE, MissForest, and GAIN), and trained five regression models: Ridge, k-NN, SVR, regression trees (bagging, random forest, boosting), and ANN. Hyperparameters were optimized via grid search with 3-fold cross-validation. Model performance was assessed using mean absolute error (MAE), root mean squared error (RMSE), and runtime through 5-fold cross-validation repeated 25 times to ensure robustness in clinical data settings.
resultsA total of 1,866 missing values (25.86%) were identified in the dataset, with only 42 complete cases (6.40%) remaining after listwise deletion, highlighting the need for effective imputation. In the initial analysis using only complete cases, support vector regression (SVR) achieved the lowest mean absolute error (MAE = 0.184), though overall performance was limited due to small sample size. In the second phase, three imputation techniques were applied, significantly improving model accuracy. MissForest combined with Random Forest produced the best results (MAE = 0.083), representing a 54.7% improvement over case deletion. Statistical analysis confirmed significant differences in performance across imputation methods (p < 0.001), with MissForest outperforming GAIN and MICE. GAIN was the fastest imputation method. DISCUSSION: The findings underscore the importance of using robust imputation strategies to maximize data utility and model reliability in studies with high missingness. Further research is needed, particularly incorporating additional neuroimaging measures, to localize the brain regions most affected by biomarker-driven changes and to refine predictive models for clinical applications.
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.