Imputation strategies for missing baseline neurological assessment covariates after traumatic brain injury: A CENTER-TBI study

Citation

Ercole A, Dixit A, Nelson DW, Bhattacharyay S, Zeiler FA, Nieboer D, Bouamra O, Menon DK, Maas AIR, Dijkland SA, Lingsma HF, Wilson L, Lecky F & Steyerberg EW (2021) Imputation strategies for missing baseline neurological assessment covariates after traumatic brain injury: A CENTER-TBI study. PLoS ONE, 16 (8), Art. No.: e0253425. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0253425

Abstract
Statistical models for outcome prediction are central to traumatic brain injury research and critical to baseline risk adjustment. Glasgow coma score (GCS) and pupil reactivity are crucial covariates in all such models but may be measured at multiple time points between the time of injury and hospital and are subject to a variable degree of unreliability and/or missingness. Imputation of missing data may be undertaken using full multiple imputation or by simple substitution of measurements from other time points. However, it is unknown which strategy is best or which time points are more predictive. We evaluated the pseudo-R2 of logistic regression models (dichotomous survival) and proportional odds models (Glasgow Outcome Score—extended) using different imputation strategies on the The Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI) study dataset. Substitution strategies were easy to implement, achieved low levels of missingness (

Journal
PLoS ONE: Volume 16, Issue 8

People

Professor Lindsay Wilson

Emeritus Professor, Psychology