Tuberculosis treatment adherence forecasting models trained on community health worker (CHW) smartphone logs face a structural problem: the logging process that generates the training signal is itself non-random, and the missingness mechanism is plausibly informative about the adherence outcome the model is meant to predict. The design parameters were fixed at between-cluster SD = 6.0, residual SD = 4.5, and intraclass correlation = 0.640; power was estimated across 2000 replications per design cell for cluster counts of 8, 16, 24 and 32 and effect sizes of 3, 5 and 8 percentage points. The analysis is a design-characterisation study, not an empirical evaluation: no observational data are used or claimed. The framework distinguishes three logging-gap regimes (ignorable, covariate-dependent, and outcome-dependent) and derives the bias that each induces in the forecast target. The design analysis indicates that 56 clusters are required to detect a 5 percentage-point effect at 80% power under the declared variance structure, and that the minimum detectable effect at 80% power falls as cluster count rises from 8 to 32. The contribution is a sensitivity protocol that makes the MNAR assumption explicit and testable rather than silently absorbed into model training.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lutchmun et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: