Public Health of School, China Medical University, No.77 Puhe Road, 110122, Shenyang, People's Republic of China.
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2020 Feb 27;20(1):42. doi: 10.1186/s12874-020-00932-0.
Incomplete data are of particular important influence in mental measurement questionnaires. Most experts, however, mostly focus on clinical trials and cohort studies and generally pay less attention to this deficiency. We aim is to compare the accuracy of four common methods for handling items missing from different psychology questionnaires according to the items non-response rates.
All data were drawn from the previous studies including the self-acceptance scale (SAQ), the activities of daily living scale (ADL) and self-esteem scale (RSES). SAQ and ADL dataset, simulation group, were used to compare and assess the ability of four imputation methods which are direct deletion, mode imputation, Hot-deck (HD) imputation and multiple imputation (MI) by absolute deviation, the root mean square error and average relative error in missing proportions of 5, 10, 15 and 20%. RSES dataset, validation group, was used to test the application of imputation methods. All analyses were finished by SAS 9.4.
The biases obtained by MI are the smallest under various missing proportions. HD imputation approach performed the lowest absolute deviation of standard deviation values. But they got the similar results and the performances of them are obviously better than direct deletion and mode imputation. In a real world situation, the respondents' average score in complete data set was 28.22 ± 4.63, which are not much different from imputed datasets. The direction of the influence of the five factors on self-esteem was consistent, although there were some differences in the size and range of OR values in logistic regression model.
MI shows the best performance while it demands slightly more data analytic capacity and skills of programming. And HD could be considered to impute missing values in psychological investigation when MI cannot be performed due to limited circumstances.
在心理测量问卷中,不完整的数据尤其具有重要影响。然而,大多数专家主要关注临床试验和队列研究,通常较少关注这一缺陷。我们的目的是根据项目无应答率比较四种常见方法处理不同心理学问卷中缺失项目的准确性。
所有数据均来自之前的研究,包括自我接纳量表(SAQ)、日常生活活动量表(ADL)和自尊量表(RSES)。SAQ 和 ADL 数据集,模拟组,用于比较和评估四种插补方法的能力,即直接删除、模式插补、热点插补(HD)和多重插补(MI),在缺失比例为 5%、10%、15%和 20%的情况下,通过绝对偏差、均方根误差和平均相对误差进行评估。RSES 数据集,验证组,用于测试插补方法的应用。所有分析均使用 SAS 9.4 完成。
在各种缺失比例下,MI 得到的偏差最小。HD 插补方法得到的标准差值的绝对偏差最小。但它们得到了相似的结果,其性能明显优于直接删除和模式插补。在实际情况中,完整数据集的受访者平均得分 28.22±4.63,与插补数据集相差不大。在逻辑回归模型中,五个因素对自尊的影响方向一致,尽管 OR 值的大小和范围略有不同。
MI 表现出最好的性能,但其要求稍微更高的数据分析能力和编程技能。当由于有限的情况而无法进行 MI 时,可以考虑使用 HD 来插补心理调查中的缺失值。