Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41301234›Full record

ArticleBioengineering (Basel, Switzerland)2025

A Two-Step Variable Selection Strategy for Multiply Imputed Survival Data Using Penalized Cox Models.

Qian Yang, Bin Luo, Chenxi Yu, Susan Halabi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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.

Qian YangDivision of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA 30322, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-8102-288X
Bin LuoSchool of Data Science and Analytics, Kennesaw State University, Marietta, GA 30060, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-3983-5676
Chenxi YuDepartment of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Duke University, Durham, NC 27708, USA.
Susan HalabiDepartment of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Duke University, Durham, NC 27708, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-4135-2777

Funding

NIH HHS 1R01CA249279-25NIH HHS 1R01CA256157-25
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Multiple imputation (MI) is widely used for handling missing data. However, applying penalized methods after MI can be challenging because variable selection may be inconsistent across imputations. We propose a two-step variable selection method for multiply imputed datasets with survival outcomes: apply LASSO or ALASSO to each MI dataset, followed by ridge regression, and combine estimates using variable selected in any or d% (d = 50, 70, 90, 100) of the MI datasets. For comparison, we also fit stacked MI datasets with weighted penalized regression and a group LASSO approach that enforces consistent selection across imputations. Simulations with Cox models evaluated tuning by AIC, BIC, cross-validation at the minimum error, and the 1SE rule. Across scenarios, performance differed by both the penalization and the selection rule. More conservative choices such as ALASSO with BIC and a 50% inclusion frequency tended to control false positive and gave more stable calibration. The grouped approach achieved comparable selection with modestly higher estimation error. Overall, no single method consistently outperformed others across all scenarios. Our findings suggest that practitioners should weigh trade-offs between selection stability, estimation accuracy, and calibration when applying penalized methods to multiply imputed survival data.

Indexed as

missing datamultiple imputationpenalized methodproportional hazards model

Identifiers

PMID41301234
PMCPMC12650151

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.