Research Article | DOI: https://doi.org/10.31579/2642-9756/118
1 Department of Natural Science, State University of Zanzibar, Zanzibar-Tanzania
2 Department of Statistics, University of Dar es Salaam, Dar es Salaam-Tanzania
*Corresponding Author: Rahibu A. Department of Natural Science, State University of Zanzibar, Zanzibar-Tanzania.
Citation: Rahibu A. Abassi, Amina S. Msengwa, Rocky R. J. Akarro. (2022). Imputation Methods on Retrospective Breast Cancer Data in Tanzania: A Comparative Study. J. Women Health Care and Issues. 5(4): DOI: 10.31579/2642-9756/118.
Copyright: © 2022 Rahibu A. Abassi. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of The Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Received: 18 April 2022 | Accepted: 25 May 2022 | Published: 06 June 2022
Keywords: breast cancer dataset; classification methods; imputation methods; missing data
Background: Clinical datasets are at risk of having missing data for several reasons including patients’ failure to attend clinical measurements and measurement recorder’s defects. Missing data can significantly affect the analysis and results might be doubtful due to bias caused by omission incomplete records during analysis especially if a dataset is small. This study aims to compare several imputation methods in terms of efficiency in filling-in missing data so as to increase prediction and classification accuracy in breast cancer dataset.
Methodology: Five imputation methods namely series mean, k-nearest neighbour, hot deck, predictive mean matching, expected maximisation via bootstrapping, and multiple imputation by chained equations were applied to replace the missing values to the real breast cancer dataset. The efficiency of imputation methods was compared by using the Root Mean Square Errors and Mean Absolute Errors to obtain a suitable complete dataset. Binary logistic regression and linear discrimination classifiers were applied to the imputed dataset to compare their efficacy on classification and discrimination.
Results: The evaluation of imputation methods revealed that the predictive mean matching method was better off compared to other imputation methods. In addition, the binary logistic regression and linear discriminant analyses yield almost similar values on overall classification rates, sensitivity and specificity.
Conclusion: The predictive mean matching imputation showed higher accuracy in estimating and replacing missing data values in a real breast cancer dataset under the study. It is a more effective and good approach to handle missing data. We recommend replacing missing data by using predictive mean matching since it is a plausible approach toward multiple imputations for numerical variables. It improves estimation and prediction accuracy over the use complete-case analysis especially when percentage of missing data is not very small.
Dear Editorial Team, Clinical Medical Reviews and Reports. My experience with the journal was highly positive. The peer-review process was rigorous, constructive, and completed in a timely manner. The reviewers provided valuable comments that helped improve the quality and clarity of our manuscript. The editorial office was professional, responsive, and supportive throughout all stages of the publication process. Communication was clear and efficient, and any questions were addressed promptly. Overall, I found the journal to maintain high scientific standards and an excellent publication workflow. I would be pleased to consider submitting future work to this journal. Best wishes from, Elena Popa.
It was my pleasure to submit my testimonial concerning the Reviewer Board of our Scientific Journal “Brain and Neurological Disorders”. The Reviewers focused on some modifications and their contribution was helpful. The ladies of our Editorial Office were also supported my efforts. It was my honor to have such a co-operation and I am looking forward for more collaboration.
Dear Grace Pierce, Editorial Coordinator of Journal of Clinical Research and Reports, Thank you for the speedy and efficient peer review process. I appreciate the fact that your peer reviewers do not take months to respond like with some other journals. I would also like to thank the editorial office for responding quickly to my questions. It is an excellent journal. I plan to submit more manuscripts in the future. Best wishes from, Robert W. McGee
Dear Grace Pierce, Editorial Coordinator of Journal of Clinical Research and Reports, Working with you and your team on our recent publication in JCRR has been a truly wonderful and enjoyable experience. The responses were prompt, and the reviewers were patient, constructive, and highly professional. One reviewer in particular gave me the feeling that a professor was carefully reading and commenting on my coursework, which was deeply touching. The entire process was straightforward and hassle‑free, with no tedious online forms to complete. I highly recommend this journal. Best wishes from, DR Aibing Rao, Head of R&D
I Appreciate the Opportunity to Share my Experience with the Journal of Clinical Research and Reports. The peer review process was timely and constructive, and the feedback provided helped improve the quality of our manuscript. The editorial office was professional, responsive, and supportive throughout the process, ensuring smooth communication and efficient handling of the submission. Overall, it was a positive experience collaborating with your team.
Dear Mercy Grace, Editorial Coordinator of Obstetrics Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, We would like to express our gratitude for your help at all stages of publishing and editing the article. The editors of the magazine answer all the necessary questions and help at every stage. We will definitely continue to cooperate and publish other works in the Obstetrics Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences! Best wishes from, Alla Konstantinovna Politova,
