ReviewMethodsX2025
Missing data imputation of climate time series: A review.
Review in MethodsX, 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
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Missing data in climate time series is a significant problem because it complicates the monitoring and prediction of climatic phenomena. The primary objective of this research document is to describe the most relevant imputation methods for missing data in the climate context over the last decade. Results reveal a superior concentration of documents on the use of imputation methods for climate time series in Asia and Europe, with notable examples from Malaysia, China, and Italy. Meanwhile, Brazil and Australia were the countries with a high number of research in America and Oceania. Moreover, temperature and precipitation were the most frequently employed climate variables. Regarding the information source, the monitoring networks were the most commonly used source for extracting data in almost all the research. On the other hand, methods such as mean techniques, simple and multiple linear regression, interpolation, and Principal Component Analysis (PCA) were the conventional statistical techniques used for imputing missing data. Furthermore, artificial neural networks demonstrated the ability to identify complex patterns in the data. Finally, Generative Adversarial Networks excel over other deep learning methods in the imputation of missing climate data.
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.