Loading…
Handling missing data in large healthcare dataset: a case study of unknown trauma outcomes
Abstract Handling of missed data is one of the main tasks in data preprocessing especially in large public service datasets. We have analysed data from the Trauma Audit and Research Network (TARN) database, the largest trauma database in Europe. For the analysis we used 165,559 trauma cases. Among t...
Saved in:
Published in: | Computers in biology and medicine 2016-08, Vol.75, p.203-216 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c490t-dc38c5dee81575e1e10f6c2e818c83a620f22044d44eb2f2c11cc8f5bf7720a33 |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c490t-dc38c5dee81575e1e10f6c2e818c83a620f22044d44eb2f2c11cc8f5bf7720a33 |
container_end_page | 216 |
container_issue | |
container_start_page | 203 |
container_title | Computers in biology and medicine |
container_volume | 75 |
creator | Mirkes, E.M Coats, T.J Levesley, J Gorban, A.N |
description | Abstract Handling of missed data is one of the main tasks in data preprocessing especially in large public service datasets. We have analysed data from the Trauma Audit and Research Network (TARN) database, the largest trauma database in Europe. For the analysis we used 165,559 trauma cases. Among them, there are 19,289 cases (13.19%) with unknown outcome. We have demonstrated that these outcomes are not missed ‘completely at random’ and, hence, it is impossible just to exclude these cases from analysis despite the large amount of available data. We have developed a system of non-stationary Markov models for the handling of missed outcomes and validated these models on the data of 15,437 patients which arrived into TARN hospitals later than 24 hours but within 30 days from injury. We used these Markov models for the analysis of mortality. In particular, we corrected the observed fraction of death. Two naïve approaches give 7.20% (available case study) or 6.36% (if we assume that all unknown outcomes are ‘alive’). The corrected value is 6.78%. Following the seminal paper of [15] the multimodality of mortality curves has become a much discussed idea. For the whole analysed TARN dataset the coefficient of mortality monotonically decreases in time but the stratified analysis of the mortality gives a different result: for lower severities the coefficient of mortality is a non-monotonic function of the time after injury and may have maxima at the second and third weeks. The approach developed here can be applied to various healthcare datasets which experience the problem of lost patients and missed outcomes. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.compbiomed.2016.06.004 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1808654795</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>1_s2_0_S0010482516301421</els_id><sourcerecordid>1808654795</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c490t-dc38c5dee81575e1e10f6c2e818c83a620f22044d44eb2f2c11cc8f5bf7720a33</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkt9rFDEQx4Mo9qz-CxLwxZc9J792cz4IWtQKBR_UF19CLpltc91NzmRXuf_ebK-l0KdCYJLMZ2Yy-Q4hlMGaAWvf7dYujfttSCP6Na83a6gL5BOyYrrbNKCEfEpWAAwaqbk6IS9K2UElQMBzcsI7wbTqYEV-n9vohxAv6RhKWay3k6Uh0sHmS6RXaIfpytmMN46C03tqqasbWqbZH2jq6RyvY_oX6ZTtPFqa5qm-DstL8qy3Q8FXt_aU_Pry-efZeXPx_eu3s48XjZMbmBrvhHbKI2qmOoUMGfSt4_WonRa25dBzDlJ6KXHLe-4Yc073att3HQcrxCl5e8y7z-nPjGUytRWHw2AjprkYpkG3SnYb9Ri0fs1Gtgv65gG6S3OOtZEbSjHOZFspfaRcTqVk7M0-h9Hmg2FgFqnMztxLZRapDNQFsoa-vi0wbxffXeCdNhX4dASwft7fgNkUFzA69CGjm4xP4TFVPjxI4qrawdnhGg9Y7nsyhRswP5aRWSaGtQKY5Ez8B_bfvcM</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1802512146</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Handling missing data in large healthcare dataset: a case study of unknown trauma outcomes</title><source>Elsevier</source><creator>Mirkes, E.M ; Coats, T.J ; Levesley, J ; Gorban, A.N</creator><creatorcontrib>Mirkes, E.M ; Coats, T.J ; Levesley, J ; Gorban, A.N</creatorcontrib><description>Abstract Handling of missed data is one of the main tasks in data preprocessing especially in large public service datasets. We have analysed data from the Trauma Audit and Research Network (TARN) database, the largest trauma database in Europe. For the analysis we used 165,559 trauma cases. Among them, there are 19,289 cases (13.19%) with unknown outcome. We have demonstrated that these outcomes are not missed ‘completely at random’ and, hence, it is impossible just to exclude these cases from analysis despite the large amount of available data. We have developed a system of non-stationary Markov models for the handling of missed outcomes and validated these models on the data of 15,437 patients which arrived into TARN hospitals later than 24 hours but within 30 days from injury. We used these Markov models for the analysis of mortality. In particular, we corrected the observed fraction of death. Two naïve approaches give 7.20% (available case study) or 6.36% (if we assume that all unknown outcomes are ‘alive’). The corrected value is 6.78%. Following the seminal paper of [15] the multimodality of mortality curves has become a much discussed idea. For the whole analysed TARN dataset the coefficient of mortality monotonically decreases in time but the stratified analysis of the mortality gives a different result: for lower severities the coefficient of mortality is a non-monotonic function of the time after injury and may have maxima at the second and third weeks. The approach developed here can be applied to various healthcare datasets which experience the problem of lost patients and missed outcomes.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0010-4825</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1879-0534</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.compbiomed.2016.06.004</identifier><identifier>PMID: 27318570</identifier><identifier>CODEN: CBMDAW</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Automatic Data Processing - methods ; Big Data ; Data cleaning ; Databases, Factual ; Datasets ; Electronic health records ; Europe - epidemiology ; Female ; Hospitals ; Humans ; Internal Medicine ; Male ; Markov Chains ; Markov models ; Missed data ; Mortality ; Other ; Risk evaluation ; Wounds and Injuries - mortality</subject><ispartof>Computers in biology and medicine, 2016-08, Vol.75, p.203-216</ispartof><rights>Elsevier Ltd</rights><rights>2016 Elsevier Ltd</rights><rights>Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.</rights><rights>Copyright Elsevier Limited Aug 01, 2016</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c490t-dc38c5dee81575e1e10f6c2e818c83a620f22044d44eb2f2c11cc8f5bf7720a33</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c490t-dc38c5dee81575e1e10f6c2e818c83a620f22044d44eb2f2c11cc8f5bf7720a33</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27318570$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Mirkes, E.M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Coats, T.J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Levesley, J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gorban, A.N</creatorcontrib><title>Handling missing data in large healthcare dataset: a case study of unknown trauma outcomes</title><title>Computers in biology and medicine</title><addtitle>Comput Biol Med</addtitle><description>Abstract Handling of missed data is one of the main tasks in data preprocessing especially in large public service datasets. We have analysed data from the Trauma Audit and Research Network (TARN) database, the largest trauma database in Europe. For the analysis we used 165,559 trauma cases. Among them, there are 19,289 cases (13.19%) with unknown outcome. We have demonstrated that these outcomes are not missed ‘completely at random’ and, hence, it is impossible just to exclude these cases from analysis despite the large amount of available data. We have developed a system of non-stationary Markov models for the handling of missed outcomes and validated these models on the data of 15,437 patients which arrived into TARN hospitals later than 24 hours but within 30 days from injury. We used these Markov models for the analysis of mortality. In particular, we corrected the observed fraction of death. Two naïve approaches give 7.20% (available case study) or 6.36% (if we assume that all unknown outcomes are ‘alive’). The corrected value is 6.78%. Following the seminal paper of [15] the multimodality of mortality curves has become a much discussed idea. For the whole analysed TARN dataset the coefficient of mortality monotonically decreases in time but the stratified analysis of the mortality gives a different result: for lower severities the coefficient of mortality is a non-monotonic function of the time after injury and may have maxima at the second and third weeks. The approach developed here can be applied to various healthcare datasets which experience the problem of lost patients and missed outcomes.</description><subject>Automatic Data Processing - methods</subject><subject>Big Data</subject><subject>Data cleaning</subject><subject>Databases, Factual</subject><subject>Datasets</subject><subject>Electronic health records</subject><subject>Europe - epidemiology</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Hospitals</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Internal Medicine</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Markov Chains</subject><subject>Markov models</subject><subject>Missed data</subject><subject>Mortality</subject><subject>Other</subject><subject>Risk evaluation</subject><subject>Wounds and Injuries - mortality</subject><issn>0010-4825</issn><issn>1879-0534</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqNkt9rFDEQx4Mo9qz-CxLwxZc9J792cz4IWtQKBR_UF19CLpltc91NzmRXuf_ebK-l0KdCYJLMZ2Yy-Q4hlMGaAWvf7dYujfttSCP6Na83a6gL5BOyYrrbNKCEfEpWAAwaqbk6IS9K2UElQMBzcsI7wbTqYEV-n9vohxAv6RhKWay3k6Uh0sHmS6RXaIfpytmMN46C03tqqasbWqbZH2jq6RyvY_oX6ZTtPFqa5qm-DstL8qy3Q8FXt_aU_Pry-efZeXPx_eu3s48XjZMbmBrvhHbKI2qmOoUMGfSt4_WonRa25dBzDlJ6KXHLe-4Yc073att3HQcrxCl5e8y7z-nPjGUytRWHw2AjprkYpkG3SnYb9Ri0fs1Gtgv65gG6S3OOtZEbSjHOZFspfaRcTqVk7M0-h9Hmg2FgFqnMztxLZRapDNQFsoa-vi0wbxffXeCdNhX4dASwft7fgNkUFzA69CGjm4xP4TFVPjxI4qrawdnhGg9Y7nsyhRswP5aRWSaGtQKY5Ez8B_bfvcM</recordid><startdate>20160801</startdate><enddate>20160801</enddate><creator>Mirkes, E.M</creator><creator>Coats, T.J</creator><creator>Levesley, J</creator><creator>Gorban, A.N</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><general>Elsevier Limited</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AL</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ARAPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>JQ2</scope><scope>K7-</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0N</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>M7Z</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>P5Z</scope><scope>P62</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>7QO</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20160801</creationdate><title>Handling missing data in large healthcare dataset: a case study of unknown trauma outcomes</title><author>Mirkes, E.M ; Coats, T.J ; Levesley, J ; Gorban, A.N</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c490t-dc38c5dee81575e1e10f6c2e818c83a620f22044d44eb2f2c11cc8f5bf7720a33</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>Automatic Data Processing - methods</topic><topic>Big Data</topic><topic>Data cleaning</topic><topic>Databases, Factual</topic><topic>Datasets</topic><topic>Electronic health records</topic><topic>Europe - epidemiology</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Hospitals</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Internal Medicine</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Markov Chains</topic><topic>Markov models</topic><topic>Missed data</topic><topic>Mortality</topic><topic>Other</topic><topic>Risk evaluation</topic><topic>Wounds and Injuries - mortality</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Mirkes, E.M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Coats, T.J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Levesley, J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gorban, A.N</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Computing Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Computer Science Collection</collection><collection>Computer Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Computing Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Biochemistry Abstracts 1</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Computers in biology and medicine</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Mirkes, E.M</au><au>Coats, T.J</au><au>Levesley, J</au><au>Gorban, A.N</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Handling missing data in large healthcare dataset: a case study of unknown trauma outcomes</atitle><jtitle>Computers in biology and medicine</jtitle><addtitle>Comput Biol Med</addtitle><date>2016-08-01</date><risdate>2016</risdate><volume>75</volume><spage>203</spage><epage>216</epage><pages>203-216</pages><issn>0010-4825</issn><eissn>1879-0534</eissn><coden>CBMDAW</coden><abstract>Abstract Handling of missed data is one of the main tasks in data preprocessing especially in large public service datasets. We have analysed data from the Trauma Audit and Research Network (TARN) database, the largest trauma database in Europe. For the analysis we used 165,559 trauma cases. Among them, there are 19,289 cases (13.19%) with unknown outcome. We have demonstrated that these outcomes are not missed ‘completely at random’ and, hence, it is impossible just to exclude these cases from analysis despite the large amount of available data. We have developed a system of non-stationary Markov models for the handling of missed outcomes and validated these models on the data of 15,437 patients which arrived into TARN hospitals later than 24 hours but within 30 days from injury. We used these Markov models for the analysis of mortality. In particular, we corrected the observed fraction of death. Two naïve approaches give 7.20% (available case study) or 6.36% (if we assume that all unknown outcomes are ‘alive’). The corrected value is 6.78%. Following the seminal paper of [15] the multimodality of mortality curves has become a much discussed idea. For the whole analysed TARN dataset the coefficient of mortality monotonically decreases in time but the stratified analysis of the mortality gives a different result: for lower severities the coefficient of mortality is a non-monotonic function of the time after injury and may have maxima at the second and third weeks. The approach developed here can be applied to various healthcare datasets which experience the problem of lost patients and missed outcomes.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><pmid>27318570</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.compbiomed.2016.06.004</doi><tpages>14</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0010-4825 |
ispartof | Computers in biology and medicine, 2016-08, Vol.75, p.203-216 |
issn | 0010-4825 1879-0534 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1808654795 |
source | Elsevier |
subjects | Automatic Data Processing - methods Big Data Data cleaning Databases, Factual Datasets Electronic health records Europe - epidemiology Female Hospitals Humans Internal Medicine Male Markov Chains Markov models Missed data Mortality Other Risk evaluation Wounds and Injuries - mortality |
title | Handling missing data in large healthcare dataset: a case study of unknown trauma outcomes |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-29T16%3A15%3A07IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Handling%20missing%20data%20in%20large%20healthcare%20dataset:%20a%20case%20study%20of%20unknown%20trauma%20outcomes&rft.jtitle=Computers%20in%20biology%20and%20medicine&rft.au=Mirkes,%20E.M&rft.date=2016-08-01&rft.volume=75&rft.spage=203&rft.epage=216&rft.pages=203-216&rft.issn=0010-4825&rft.eissn=1879-0534&rft.coden=CBMDAW&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.compbiomed.2016.06.004&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1808654795%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c490t-dc38c5dee81575e1e10f6c2e818c83a620f22044d44eb2f2c11cc8f5bf7720a33%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1802512146&rft_id=info:pmid/27318570&rfr_iscdi=true |