Dataset Information

Multiple imputation to evaluate the impact of an assay change in national surveys.

ABSTRACT: National health surveys, such as the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, are used to monitor trends of nutritional biomarkers. These surveys try to maintain the same biomarker assay over time, but there are a variety of reasons why the assay may change. In these cases, it is important to evaluate the potential impact of a change so that any observed fluctuations in concentrations over time are not confounded by changes in the assay. To this end, a subset of stored specimens previously analyzed with the old assay is retested using the new assay. These paired data are used to estimate an adjustment equation, which is then used to 'adjust' all the old assay results and convert them into 'equivalent' units of the new assay. In this paper, we present a new way of approaching this problem using modern statistical methods designed for missing data. Using simulations, we compare the proposed multiple imputation approach with the adjustment equation approach currently in use. We also compare these approaches using real National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey data for 25-hydroxyvitamin D. Published 2017. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.

SUBMITTER: Sternberg M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5701520 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Multiple imputation to evaluate the impact of an assay change in national surveys.

Sternberg Maya M

Statistics in medicine 20170416 17

National health surveys, such as the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, are used to monitor trends of nutritional biomarkers. These surveys try to maintain the same biomarker assay over time, but there are a variety of reasons why the assay may change. In these cases, it is important to evaluate the potential impact of a change so that any observed fluctuations in concentrations over time are not confounded by changes in the assay. To this end, a subset of stored specimens previou ...[more]

PMID: 28419523

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAs the amount of data from genome wide association studies grows dramatically, many interesting scientific questions require imputation to combine or expand datasets. However, there are two situations for which imputation has been problematic: (1) polymorphisms with low minor allele frequency (MAF), and (2) datasets where subjects are genotyped on different platforms. Traditional measures of imputation cannot effectively address these problems.Methodology/principal findingsWe introduce a new statistic, the imputation quality score (IQS). In order to differentiate between well-imputed and poorly-imputed single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), IQS adjusts the concordance between imputed and genotyped SNPs for chance. We first evaluated IQS in relation to minor allele frequency. Using a sample of subjects genotyped on the Illumina 1 M array, we extracted those SNPs that were also on the Illumina 550 K array and imputed them to the full set of the 1 M SNPs. As expected, the average IQS value drops dramatically with a decrease in minor allele frequency, indicating that IQS appropriately adjusts for minor allele frequency. We then evaluated whether IQS can filter poorly-imputed SNPs in situations where cases and controls are genotyped on different platforms. Randomly dividing the data into "cases" and "controls", we extracted the Illumina 550 K SNPs from the cases and imputed the remaining Illumina 1 M SNPs. The initial Q-Q plot for the test of association between cases and controls was grossly distorted (lambda = 1.15) and had 4016 false positives, reflecting imputation error. After filtering out SNPs with IQS<0.9, the Q-Q plot was acceptable and there were no longer false positives. We then evaluated the robustness of IQS computed independently on the two halves of the data. In both European Americans and African Americans the correlation was >0.99 demonstrating that a database of IQS values from common imputations could be used as an effective filter to combine data genotyped on different platforms.Conclusions/significanceIQS effectively differentiates well-imputed and poorly-imputed SNPs. It is particularly useful for SNPs with low minor allele frequency and when datasets are genotyped on different platforms.

Project description:BackgroundImputation of partially missing or unobserved genotypes is an indispensable tool for SNP data analyses. However, research and understanding of the impact of initial SNP-data quality control on imputation results is still limited. In this paper, we aim to evaluate the effect of different strategies of pre-imputation quality filtering on the performance of the widely used imputation algorithms MaCH and IMPUTE.ResultsWe considered three scenarios: imputation of partially missing genotypes with usage of an external reference panel, without usage of an external reference panel, as well as imputation of completely un-typed SNPs using an external reference panel. We first created various datasets applying different SNP quality filters and masking certain percentages of randomly selected high-quality SNPs. We imputed these SNPs and compared the results between the different filtering scenarios by using established and newly proposed measures of imputation quality. While the established measures assess certainty of imputation results, our newly proposed measures focus on the agreement with true genotypes. These measures showed that pre-imputation SNP-filtering might be detrimental regarding imputation quality. Moreover, the strongest drivers of imputation quality were in general the burden of missingness and the number of SNPs used for imputation. We also found that using a reference panel always improves imputation quality of partially missing genotypes. MaCH performed slightly better than IMPUTE2 in most of our scenarios. Again, these results were more pronounced when using our newly defined measures of imputation quality.ConclusionEven a moderate filtering has a detrimental effect on the imputation quality. Therefore little or no SNP filtering prior to imputation appears to be the best strategy for imputing small to moderately sized datasets. Our results also showed that for these datasets, MaCH performs slightly better than IMPUTE2 in most scenarios at the cost of increased computing time.

Project description:BackgroundWhen studying the association between treatment and a clinical outcome, a parametric multivariable model of the conditional outcome expectation is often used to adjust for covariates. The treatment coefficient of the outcome model targets a conditional treatment effect. Model-based standardization is typically applied to average the model predictions over the target covariate distribution, and generate a covariate-adjusted estimate of the marginal treatment effect.MethodsThe standard approach to model-based standardization involves maximum-likelihood estimation and use of the non-parametric bootstrap. We introduce a novel, general-purpose, model-based standardization method based on multiple imputation that is easily applicable when the outcome model is a generalized linear model. We term our proposed approach multiple imputation marginalization (MIM). MIM consists of two main stages: the generation of synthetic datasets and their analysis. MIM accommodates a Bayesian statistical framework, which naturally allows for the principled propagation of uncertainty, integrates the analysis into a probabilistic framework, and allows for the incorporation of prior evidence.ResultsWe conduct a simulation study to benchmark the finite-sample performance of MIM in conjunction with a parametric outcome model. The simulations provide proof-of-principle in scenarios with binary outcomes, continuous-valued covariates, a logistic outcome model and the marginal log odds ratio as the target effect measure. When parametric modeling assumptions hold, MIM yields unbiased estimation in the target covariate distribution, valid coverage rates, and similar precision and efficiency than the standard approach to model-based standardization.ConclusionWe demonstrate that multiple imputation can be used to marginalize over a target covariate distribution, providing appropriate inference with a correctly specified parametric outcome model and offering statistical performance comparable to that of the standard approach to model-based standardization.

Dataset Information

Multiple imputation to evaluate the impact of an assay change in national surveys.

Publications

Multiple imputation to evaluate the impact of an assay change in national surveys.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets