IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0180033.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Validity of using multiple imputation for "unknown" stage at diagnosis in population-based cancer registry data

Author

Listed:
  • Qingwei Luo
  • Sam Egger
  • Xue Qin Yu
  • David P Smith
  • Dianne L O’Connell

Abstract

Background: The multiple imputation approach to missing data has been validated by a number of simulation studies by artificially inducing missingness on fully observed stage data under a pre-specified missing data mechanism. However, the validity of multiple imputation has not yet been assessed using real data. The objective of this study was to assess the validity of using multiple imputation for “unknown” prostate cancer stage recorded in the New South Wales Cancer Registry (NSWCR) in real-world conditions. Methods: Data from the population-based cohort study NSW Prostate Cancer Care and Outcomes Study (PCOS) were linked to 2000–2002 NSWCR data. For cases with “unknown” NSWCR stage, PCOS-stage was extracted from clinical notes. Logistic regression was used to evaluate the missing at random assumption adjusted for variables from two imputation models: a basic model including NSWCR variables only and an enhanced model including the same NSWCR variables together with PCOS primary treatment. Cox regression was used to evaluate the performance of MI. Results: Of the 1864 prostate cancer cases 32.7% were recorded as having “unknown” NSWCR stage. The missing at random assumption was satisfied when the logistic regression included the variables included in the enhanced model, but not those in the basic model only. The Cox models using data with imputed stage from either imputation model provided generally similar estimated hazard ratios but with wider confidence intervals compared with those derived from analysis of the data with PCOS-stage. However, the complete-case analysis of the data provided a considerably higher estimated hazard ratio for the low socio-economic status group and rural areas in comparison with those obtained from all other datasets. Conclusions: Using MI to deal with “unknown” stage data recorded in a population-based cancer registry appears to provide valid estimates. We would recommend a cautious approach to the use of this method elsewhere.

Suggested Citation

  • Qingwei Luo & Sam Egger & Xue Qin Yu & David P Smith & Dianne L O’Connell, 2017. "Validity of using multiple imputation for "unknown" stage at diagnosis in population-based cancer registry data," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(6), pages 1-16, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0180033
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0180033
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0180033
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0180033&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0180033?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Nisa Boukichou-Abdelkader & Miguel Ángel Montero-Alonso & Alberto Muñoz-García, 2022. "Different Routes or Methods of Application for Dimensionality Reduction in Multicenter Studies Databases," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-14, February.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0180033. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.