The reporting and handling of missing data in longitudinal studies of older adults is suboptimal: a methodological survey of geriatric journals
Abstract Background Missing data are common in longitudinal studies, and more so, in studies of older adults, who are susceptible to health and functional decline that limit completion of assessments. We assessed the extent, current reporting, and handling of missing data in longitudinal studies of...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
BMC
2022-04-01
|
| Series: | BMC Medical Research Methodology |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-022-01605-w |
| _version_ | 1811338820197548032 |
|---|---|
| author | Chinenye Okpara Chidozie Edokwe George Ioannidis Alexandra Papaioannou Jonathan D. Adachi Lehana Thabane |
| author_facet | Chinenye Okpara Chidozie Edokwe George Ioannidis Alexandra Papaioannou Jonathan D. Adachi Lehana Thabane |
| author_sort | Chinenye Okpara |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract Background Missing data are common in longitudinal studies, and more so, in studies of older adults, who are susceptible to health and functional decline that limit completion of assessments. We assessed the extent, current reporting, and handling of missing data in longitudinal studies of older adults. Methods Medline and Embase databases were searched from 2015 to 2019 for publications on longitudinal observational studies conducted among persons ≥55 years old. The search was restricted to 10 general geriatric journals published in English. Reporting and handling of missing data were assessed using questions developed from the recommended standards. Data were summarised descriptively as frequencies and proportions. Results A total of 165 studies were included in the review from 7032 identified records. In approximately half of the studies 97 (62.5%), there was either no comment on missing data or unclear descriptions. The percentage of missing data varied from 0.1 to 55%, with a 14% average among the studies that reported having missing data. Complete case analysis was the most common method for handling missing data with nearly 75% of the studies (n = 52) excluding individual observations due to missing data, at the initial phase of study inclusion or at the analysis stage. Of the 10 studies where multiple imputation was used, only 1 (10.0%) study followed the guideline for reporting the procedure fully using online supplementary documents. Conclusion The current reporting and handling of missing data in longitudinal observational studies of older adults are inadequate. Journal endorsement and implementation of guidelines may potentially improve the quality of missing data reporting. Further, authors should be encouraged to use online supplementary files to provide additional details on how missing data were addressed, to allow for more transparency and comprehensive appraisal of studies. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-13T18:16:09Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-984a5a2806744ac3905446ba0aa495a9 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1471-2288 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-13T18:16:09Z |
| publishDate | 2022-04-01 |
| publisher | BMC |
| record_format | Article |
| series | BMC Medical Research Methodology |
| spelling | doaj.art-984a5a2806744ac3905446ba0aa495a92022-12-22T02:35:39ZengBMCBMC Medical Research Methodology1471-22882022-04-012211910.1186/s12874-022-01605-wThe reporting and handling of missing data in longitudinal studies of older adults is suboptimal: a methodological survey of geriatric journalsChinenye Okpara0Chidozie Edokwe1George Ioannidis2Alexandra Papaioannou3Jonathan D. Adachi4Lehana Thabane5Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, McMaster UniversityRoche Products Ltd, IkejaDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, McMaster UniversityDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, McMaster UniversityGERAS Centre, Hamilton Health SciencesDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, McMaster UniversityAbstract Background Missing data are common in longitudinal studies, and more so, in studies of older adults, who are susceptible to health and functional decline that limit completion of assessments. We assessed the extent, current reporting, and handling of missing data in longitudinal studies of older adults. Methods Medline and Embase databases were searched from 2015 to 2019 for publications on longitudinal observational studies conducted among persons ≥55 years old. The search was restricted to 10 general geriatric journals published in English. Reporting and handling of missing data were assessed using questions developed from the recommended standards. Data were summarised descriptively as frequencies and proportions. Results A total of 165 studies were included in the review from 7032 identified records. In approximately half of the studies 97 (62.5%), there was either no comment on missing data or unclear descriptions. The percentage of missing data varied from 0.1 to 55%, with a 14% average among the studies that reported having missing data. Complete case analysis was the most common method for handling missing data with nearly 75% of the studies (n = 52) excluding individual observations due to missing data, at the initial phase of study inclusion or at the analysis stage. Of the 10 studies where multiple imputation was used, only 1 (10.0%) study followed the guideline for reporting the procedure fully using online supplementary documents. Conclusion The current reporting and handling of missing data in longitudinal observational studies of older adults are inadequate. Journal endorsement and implementation of guidelines may potentially improve the quality of missing data reporting. Further, authors should be encouraged to use online supplementary files to provide additional details on how missing data were addressed, to allow for more transparency and comprehensive appraisal of studies.https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-022-01605-wMissing dataLongitudinal studiesReviewMethodsOlder adults |
| spellingShingle | Chinenye Okpara Chidozie Edokwe George Ioannidis Alexandra Papaioannou Jonathan D. Adachi Lehana Thabane The reporting and handling of missing data in longitudinal studies of older adults is suboptimal: a methodological survey of geriatric journals BMC Medical Research Methodology Missing data Longitudinal studies Review Methods Older adults |
| title | The reporting and handling of missing data in longitudinal studies of older adults is suboptimal: a methodological survey of geriatric journals |
| title_full | The reporting and handling of missing data in longitudinal studies of older adults is suboptimal: a methodological survey of geriatric journals |
| title_fullStr | The reporting and handling of missing data in longitudinal studies of older adults is suboptimal: a methodological survey of geriatric journals |
| title_full_unstemmed | The reporting and handling of missing data in longitudinal studies of older adults is suboptimal: a methodological survey of geriatric journals |
| title_short | The reporting and handling of missing data in longitudinal studies of older adults is suboptimal: a methodological survey of geriatric journals |
| title_sort | reporting and handling of missing data in longitudinal studies of older adults is suboptimal a methodological survey of geriatric journals |
| topic | Missing data Longitudinal studies Review Methods Older adults |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-022-01605-w |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT chinenyeokpara thereportingandhandlingofmissingdatainlongitudinalstudiesofolderadultsissuboptimalamethodologicalsurveyofgeriatricjournals AT chidozieedokwe thereportingandhandlingofmissingdatainlongitudinalstudiesofolderadultsissuboptimalamethodologicalsurveyofgeriatricjournals AT georgeioannidis thereportingandhandlingofmissingdatainlongitudinalstudiesofolderadultsissuboptimalamethodologicalsurveyofgeriatricjournals AT alexandrapapaioannou thereportingandhandlingofmissingdatainlongitudinalstudiesofolderadultsissuboptimalamethodologicalsurveyofgeriatricjournals AT jonathandadachi thereportingandhandlingofmissingdatainlongitudinalstudiesofolderadultsissuboptimalamethodologicalsurveyofgeriatricjournals AT lehanathabane thereportingandhandlingofmissingdatainlongitudinalstudiesofolderadultsissuboptimalamethodologicalsurveyofgeriatricjournals AT chinenyeokpara reportingandhandlingofmissingdatainlongitudinalstudiesofolderadultsissuboptimalamethodologicalsurveyofgeriatricjournals AT chidozieedokwe reportingandhandlingofmissingdatainlongitudinalstudiesofolderadultsissuboptimalamethodologicalsurveyofgeriatricjournals AT georgeioannidis reportingandhandlingofmissingdatainlongitudinalstudiesofolderadultsissuboptimalamethodologicalsurveyofgeriatricjournals AT alexandrapapaioannou reportingandhandlingofmissingdatainlongitudinalstudiesofolderadultsissuboptimalamethodologicalsurveyofgeriatricjournals AT jonathandadachi reportingandhandlingofmissingdatainlongitudinalstudiesofolderadultsissuboptimalamethodologicalsurveyofgeriatricjournals AT lehanathabane reportingandhandlingofmissingdatainlongitudinalstudiesofolderadultsissuboptimalamethodologicalsurveyofgeriatricjournals |