AccScience Publishing / AIH / Online First / DOI: 10.36922/aih.4406
Submit to AIH
Cite this article
3
Download
87
Views
Journal Browser
Volume | Year
Issue
Search
Forthcoming Issue
Current Issue
View All
News and Announcements
View All
ORIGINAL RESEARCH ARTICLE

Benchmarking machine learning missing data imputation methods in large-scale mental health survey databases

Preethi Prakash1 ,  Kelly Street2 ,  Shrikanth Narayanan3 ,  Bridget A. Fernandez4,5 ,  Yufeng Shen6 ,  Chang Shu7*
Show Less
1 Department of Computer Science, Fu Foundation School of Engineering and Applied Science, Columbia University, New York, NY, United States of America
2 Department of Population and Public Health Sciences, Division of Biostatistics, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, United States of America
3 Viterbi School of Engineering, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, United States of America
4 Department of Pediatrics, Division of Medical Genetics, Children’s Hospital Los Angeles and The Saban Research Institute, Los Angeles, CA, United States of America
5 Department of Pediatrics, Keck School of Medicine of USC, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, United States of America
6 Departments of Systems Biology and Biomedical Informatics, and JP Sulzberger Columbia Genome Center, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, United States of America
7 Department of Population and Public Health Sciences, Center for Genetic Epidemiology, Division of Epidemiology and Genetics, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, United States of America
AIH, 4406 https://doi.org/10.36922/aih.4406
Submitted: 1 August 2024 | Accepted: 14 October 2024 | Published: 7 November 2024
© 2024 by the Author(s). This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ )
Download PDF
Cite
XML
Abstract

Databases tied to mental and behavioral health surveys suffer from the issue of missing data when participants skip the entire survey, which affects the data quality and sample size. These missing data patterns were investigated and the imputation performance was evaluated in Simons Foundations Powering Autism Research for Knowledge, a large-scale autism cohort consists of over 117,000 participants. Four common methods were assessed – Multiple imputation by chained equations (MICE), K-nearest neighbors (KNN), MissForest, and multiple imputation with denoising autoencoders (MIDAS). In a complete subset of 15,196 autism participants, three types of missingness patterns were simulated. We observed that MIDAS and KNN performed the best as the random missingness rate increased and when blockwise missingness was simulated. The average computational times were each 10 min for MIDAS and KNN, 35 min for MissForest, and 290 min for MICE. MIDAS and KNN both provide promising imputation performance in mental and behavioral health survey data that exhibit blockwise missingness patterns.

Keywords
Missing data
Mental health survey
Imputation methods
Machine learning
Funding
This work is supported by Southern California Environmental Health Sciences Center pilot grant from NIH/NIEHS, grant number P30ES007048 (Rob McConnell), and The Tobacco-Related Disease Research Program, grant number T32IR5216 (Xuejuan Jiang) and NIH/NIA, grant number 1RF1AG076124-01A1 (Hussein Yassine).
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.
References
  1. Feliciano P, Daniels AM, Snyder LG, et al. SPARK: A US cohort of 50,000 families to accelerate autism research. Neuron. 2018;97:488-493. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2018.01.015

 

  1. Davis KAS, Coleman JRI, Adams M, et al. Mental health in UK Biobank - development, implementation and results from an online questionnaire completed by 157 366 participants: A reanalysis. BJPsych Open. 2020;6:e18. doi: 10.1192/bjo.2019.100

 

  1. Ramirez AH, Sulieman L, Schlueter DJ, et al. The all of Us research program: Data quality, utility, and diversity. Patterns (N Y). 2022;3:100570. doi: 10.1016/j.patter.2022.100570

 

  1. Chesnut SR, Wei T, Barnard-Brak L, Richman DM. A meta-analysis of the social communication questionnaire: Screening for autism spectrum disorder. Autism. 2017;21:920-928. doi: 10.1177/1362361316660065

 

  1. Hooker JL, Dow D, Morgan L, Schatschneider C, Wetherby AM. Psychometric analysis of the repetitive behavior scale-revised using confirmatory factor analysis in children with autism. Autism Res. 2019;12:1399-1410. doi: 10.1002/aur.2159

 

  1. Van Damme T, Vancampfort D, Thoen A, Sanchez CPR, van Biesen D. Evaluation of the Developmental Coordination Questionnaire (DCDQ) as a screening instrument for co-occurring motor problems in children with autism spectrum disorder. J Autism Dev Disord. 2022;52:4079-4088. doi: 10.1007/s10803-021-05285-1

 

  1. Jebb AT, Ng V, Tay L. A review of key likert scale development advances: 1995-2019. Front Psychol. 2021;12:637547. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.637547

 

  1. Mirzaei A, Carter SR, Patanwala AE, Schneider CR. Missing data in surveys: Key concepts, approaches, and applications. Res Soc Adm Pharm. 2022;18:2308-2316. doi: 10.1016/j.sapharm.2021.03.009

 

  1. Mack C, Su Z, Westreich D. Managing Missing Data in Patient Registries: Addendum to Registries for Evaluating Patient Outcomes: A User’s Guide, Third Edition. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2018.

 

  1. Khan SI, Hoque ASM. SICE: An improved missing data imputation technique. J Big Data. 2020;7:37. doi: 10.1186/s40537-020-00313-w

 

  1. Phiwhorm K, Saikaew C, Leung CK, Polpinit P, Saikaew KR. Adaptive multiple imputations of missing values using the class center. J Big Data. 2022;9:52. doi: 10.1186/s40537-022-00608-0

 

  1. De Goeij MCM, van Diepen M, Jager KJ, Tripepi G, Zoccali C, Dekker FW. Multiple imputation: Dealing with missing data. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2013;28:2415-2420. doi: 10.1093/ndt/gft221

 

  1. Van Buuren S, Groothuis-Oudshoorn K. Mice: Multivariate imputation by chained equations in R. J Stat Softw. 2011;45:1-67. doi: 10.18637/jss.v045.i03

 

  1. Azur MJ, Stuart EA, Frangakis C, Leaf PJ. Multiple imputation by chained equations: What is it and how does it work? Int J Methods Psychiatr Res. 2011;20:40-49. doi: 10.1002/mpr.329

 

  1. Taunk K, De S, Verma S, Swetapadma A. A Brief Review of Nearest Neighbor Algorithm for Learning and Classification. In: 2019 International Conference on Intelligent Computing and Control Systems (ICCS). IEE; 2019.

 

  1. Stekhoven DJ, Bühlmann P. MissForest--non-parametric missing value imputation for mixed-type data. Bioinformatics. 2011;28:112-118. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btr597

 

  1. Lall R, Robinson T. The MIDAS touch: Accurate and scalable missing-data imputation with deep learning. Polit Anal. 2022;30:179-196. doi: 10.1017/pan.2020.49

 

  1. Shrive FM, Stuart H, Quan H, Ghali WA. Dealing with missing data in a multi-question depression scale: A comparison of imputation methods. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2006;6:57. doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-6-57

 

  1. Peyre H, Leplège A, Coste J. Missing data methods for dealing with missing items in quality of life questionnaires. A comparison by simulation of personal mean score, full information maximum likelihood, multiple imputation, and hot deck techniques applied to the SF-36 in the French 2003 decennial health survey. Qual Life Res. 2011;20:287-300. doi: 10.1007/s11136-010-9740-3

 

  1. Emmanuel T, Maupong T, Mpoeleng D, Semong T, Mphago B, Tabona O. A survey on missing data in machine learning. J Big Data. 2021;8:140. doi: 10.1186/s40537-021-00516-9

 

  1. Xu X, Xia L, Zhang Q, Wu S, Wu M, Liu H. The ability of different imputation methods for missing values in mental measurement questionnaires. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2020;20:42. doi: 10.1186/s12874-020-00932-0

 

  1. Croy CD, Novins DK. Methods for addressing missing data in psychiatric and developmental research. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2005;44:1230-1240. doi: 10.1097/01.chi.0000181044.06337.6f

 

  1. Lee JH, Huber JC Jr. Evaluation of multiple imputation with large proportions of missing data: How much is too much? Iran J Public Health. 2021;50:1372-1380. doi: 10.18502/ijph.v50i7.6626

 

  1. Petrazzini BO, Naya H, Lopez-Bello F, Vazquez G, Spangenberg L. Evaluation of different approaches for missing data imputation on features associated to genomic data. BioData Mining. 2021;14:44. doi: 10.1186/s13040-021-00274-7

 

  1. Pedregosa F, Varoquaux G, Gramfort A, et al. Scikit-learn: Machine learning in Python. J Mach Learn Res. 2011;12:2825-2830.

 

  1. Lall R, Robinson T. Efficient multiple imputation for diverse data in python and R: MIDASpy and rMIDAS. J Stat Softw. 2023;107:1-38. doi: 10.18637/jss.v107.i09

 

  1. Fawns-Ritchie C, Deary IJ. Reliability and validity of the UK Biobank cognitive tests. PLoS One. 2020;15:e0231627. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0231627

 

  1. Schweren LJS, van Rooij D, Shi H, et al. Diet, physical activity, and disinhibition in middle-aged and older adults: A UK biobank study. Nutrients. 2021;13:1607. doi: 10.3390/nu13051607

 

  1. Grau E, Frechtel P, Odom D, Painter D. A Simple Evaluation of the Imputation Procedures Used in NSDUH. In: Proceedings of the 2004 Joint Statistical Meetings, American Statistical Association, Section on Survey Research Methods, Toronto, Ontario, Canada [CD-ROM]. Alexandria, VA: American Statistical; 2004.

 

  1. An U, Pazokitoroudi A, Alvarez M, et al. Deep learning-based phenotype imputation on population-scale biobank data increases genetic discoveries. Nat Genet. 2023;55:2269-2276. doi: 10.1038/s41588-023-01558-w
Share
Back to top
Artificial Intelligence in Health, Electronic ISSN: 3029-2387 Print ISSN: 3041-0894, Published by AccScience Publishing
We use cookies on our website to ensure you get the best experience.
Read more about our cookies here
Accept