ArticleCommunications AI & computing2026
Structured missingness in biomedical research.
Article in Communications AI & computing, 2026. 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
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Missing data are ubiquitous in biomedical research, and become particularly problematic when combining data from multiple clinical studies, an increasingly common practice for building models that generalise across populations. This process introduces complex structured patterns of missing data ('structured missingness'), where one study may omit variables that another collects, leaving deterministic gaps that standard imputation methods were not designed to handle. Here, we show that many popular imputation algorithms systematically fail under structured missingness, distorting the underlying statistical properties of the data in ways that conventional accuracy metrics cannot detect. Methods designed to preserve data distributions are more robust, and a hierarchical modelling approach that explicitly accounts for site-specific differences further improves performance. We introduce a multi-metric evaluation framework and a practical decision guide to support method selection. Our findings highlight the need for more principled imputation approaches in multi-site biomedical research and provide concrete tools to address this challenge.
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.