Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42399576›Full record

ArticlePrevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research2026

Tutorial: Using Random Forest Analysis to Identify Auxiliary Variables of Missing Data.

Stefany Coxe, Amanda N Baraldi, Timothy Hayes

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Prevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Stefany CoxeBiostatistics Shared Resource, Cedars-Sinai Cancer, Los Angeles, CA, USA. stefany.coxe@csmc.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2203-0775
Amanda N BaraldiDepartment of Psychology, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1978-4768
Timothy HayesDepartment of Psychology, Florida International University, Miami, FL, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7530-0241

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Missing data is a pervasive problem in research; prevention science is particularly vulnerable due to the study designs used and types of data collected. Recommended approaches to address missing data include full information maximum likelihood estimation and multiple imputation, both of which rely on identification of auxiliary variables related to missingness. The methodological literature recommends including as many potential auxiliary variables as possible, but in practice, that is often infeasible and a researcher must select a more limited number. Prior studies have shown that traditional methods for identifying auxiliary variables do not perform well when missingness follows a nonlinear functional form, but machine learning methods such as random forest analysis (RFA) perform well at successfully identifying correlates of missingness across a variety of missing at random patterns. RFA models can also provide measures of variable importance, allowing researchers to prioritize inclusion of the most relevant variables. Methods like RFA are less familiar to prevention researchers, which serves as an impediment for researchers to use RFA to identify auxiliary variables. This paper provides a tutorial to use RFA to identify correlates of missingness using a real data sample of

Indexed as

Auxiliary variablesMissing dataRandom forestTutorial

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.