title: Is there a role for expectation maximization imputation in addressing missing data in research using WOMAC questionnaire? Comparison to the standard mean approach and a tutorial.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Standard mean imputation for missing values in the Western Ontario and Mc Master (WOMAC) Osteoarthritis Index limits the use of collected data and may lead to bias. Probability model-based imputation methods overcome such limitations but were never before applied to the WOMAC. In this study, we compare imputation results for the Expectation Maximization method (EM) and the mean imputation method for WOMAC in a cohort of total hip replacement patients.
  
  
  METHODS
  WOMAC data on a consecutive cohort of 2,062 patients scheduled for surgery were analyzed. Rates of missing values in each of the WOMAC items from this large cohort were used to create missing patterns in the subset of patients with complete data. EM and the WOMAC's method of imputation are then applied to fill the missing values. Summary score statistics for both methods are then described through box-plot and contrasted with the complete case (CC) analysis and the true score (TS). This process is repeated using a smaller sample size of 200 randomly drawn patients with higher missing rate (5 times the rates of missing values observed in the 2,062 patients capped at 45%).
  
  
  RESULTS
  Rate of missing values per item ranged from 2.9% to 14.5% and 1,339 patients had complete data. Probability model-based EM imputed a score for all subjects while WOMAC's imputation method did not. Mean subscale scores were very similar for both imputation methods and were similar to the true score; however, the EM method results were more consistent with the TS after simulation. This difference became more pronounced as the number of items in a subscale increased and the sample size decreased.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The EM method provides a better alternative to the WOMAC imputation method. The EM method is more accurate and imputes data to create a complete data set. These features are very valuable for patient-reported outcomes research in which resources are limited and the WOMAC score is used in a multivariate analysis.
authors: Department of Public Health, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, USA. hag2008@med.cornell.edu
authors: Hassan M K
authors: HM
authors: Ghomrawi
authors: Lisa A
authors: LA
authors: Mandl
authors: John
authors: J
authors: Rutledge
authors: Michael M
authors: MM
authors: Alexiades
authors: Madhu
authors: M
authors: Mazumdar
references: Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2005 Dec;13(12):1076-83
references: 16154777
references: J Rheumatol. 1988 Dec;15(12):1833-40
references: 3068365
references: J Orthop Surg Res. 2007 Dec 07;2:25
references: 18062822
references: BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2003 May 30;4:10
references: 12777182
references: Ann Rheum Dis. 2005 Jan;64(1):75-9
references: 15608303
references: Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2003 Nov 03;1:64
references: 14613558
references: Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2003 May 25;1:17
references: 12801417
references: Arthritis Rheum. 2007 May 15;57(4):633-8
references: 17471534
references: Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2005 Sep-Oct;23(5 Suppl 39):S148-53
references: 16273799
references: Evid Rep Technol Assess (Summ). 2003 Dec;(86):1-8
references: 15160414
references: Ann Rheum Dis. 2008 Apr;67(4):494-9
references: 17704063