Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41257449›Full record

ArticleStatistics in medicine2025

A Bayesian Two-Step Multiple Imputation Approach Based on Mixed Models for Missing EMA Data.

Yiheng Wei, Juned Siddique, Bonnie Spring, Donald Hedeker

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Statistics in medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

4 authors.

Yiheng WeiDepartment of Biostatistics, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, New York, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0007-2211-8850
Juned SiddiqueDepartment of Preventive Medicine, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Bonnie SpringCollege of Medicine, Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida, USA.
Donald HedekerDepartment of Public Health Sciences, The University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA.

Funding

Pilot Program CoreP30ES027792 · NIEHS · UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO · PI Gokhan M. Mutlu, Gail S Prins · 2017 to 2026
$13.6M
Methodological and data-driven approach to infer durable behavior change from mHealth dataR01DK125414 · NIDDK · NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY AT CHICAGO · PI HEDEKER, DONALD, SPRING, BONNIE · 2020 to 2023
$2.0M
NIDDK NIH HHS R01 DK125414NIDDK NIH HHS R01DK125414NIEHS NIH HHS P30 ES027792
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ecological Momentary Assessments (EMA) capture real-time thoughts and behaviors in natural settings, producing rich longitudinal data for statistical analyses. However, the robustness of these analyses can be compromised by the large amount of missing data in EMA studies. To address this, multiple imputation, a method that replaces missing values with several plausible alternatives, has become increasingly popular. In this article, we introduce a two-step Bayesian multiple imputation framework which leverages the configuration of mixed models. We adopt and compare: (1) the Random Intercept Linear Mixed model; (2) the Mixed-effect Location Scale (MELS) model which accounts for subject variance influenced by covariates and random effects; and (3) the Shared Parameter MELS model which additionally links the missing data to the response variable through a random intercept logistic model. Each of these three can be used to complete the posterior distribution within the framework. In the simulation study, we extend this two-step Bayesian multiple imputation strategy to handle simultaneous missing variables in EMA data and compare the effectiveness of the multiple imputations across the three mixed models. Our analyses highlight the advantages of multiple imputations over single imputations and underscore the importance of selecting an appropriate model for the imputation process. Specifically, modeling within-subject variance and linking the missingness mechanism to the response will greatly improve the performance in certain scenarios. Furthermore, we applied our techniques to the "Make Better Choices 1 (MBC1)" study, highlighting the distinction, in particular, of imputation results between the Random Intercept Linear Mixed model and the two MELS models in terms of modeling within-subject variance.

Indexed as

Ecological Momentary AssessmentModels, StatisticalBayes TheoremComputer SimulationData Interpretation, StatisticalHumansLinear ModelsLogistic ModelsLongitudinal Studiesecological momentary assessmentsinformative missinglongitudinal datamixed modelshared parameter model

Identifiers

PMID41257449
PMCPMC12628364

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.