Analysis reveals that imputation methods significantly affect quality of life measures in esophageal cancer, suggesting best practices for patient-reported outcomes.
Missing data is common in patient-reported outcomes (PRO) research, particularly in oncology settings. We evaluated seven methods for handling missing data in esophageal cancer quality of life measurements, namely: Multiple Imputation by Chained Equations (MICE), Variational Autoencoder (VAE), Denoising Autoen-coder (DAE), Bayesian Principal Component Analysis (BPCA), a deep autoencoder method with patient-specific embeddings and temporal pattern modeling, SoftImpute (a matrix completion method using iterative soft-thresholded singular value decomposition), and K-Nearest Neighbors (KNN). Using data from McGill University’s Esophageal and Gastric Data- and Bio-Bank, we compared these methods across 44 Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Esophageal (FACT-E) quality-of-life variables on execution time, distribution preservation, correlation maintenance, imputation accuracy, and clinical classification performance. Our comprehensive validation framework provides evidence-based recommendations for selecting appropriate imputation methods for esophageal cancer PRO research, which may improve the validity and reliability of research findings in this domain.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kweon et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: