Cited by 7Machine Learning in HealthcareHealthcare Technology and Patient MonitoringArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare

Preserving Informative Presence: How Missing Data and Imputation Strategies Affect the Performance of an AI-Based Early Warning Score

Open access
Sim, Taeyong, Hahn, Sangchul, Kim, Kwang-Joon, Cho, Eun-Young, Jeong, Yeeun, Kim, Ji-hyun, Ha, Eun-Yeong, Kim, In-Cheol +5 more·2025·Journal of Clinical Medicine

Abstract

Background/Objectives: Data availability can affect the performance of AI-based early warning scores (EWSs). This study evaluated how the extent of missing data and imputation strategies influence the predictive performance of the VitalCare–Major Adverse Event Score (VC-MAES), an AI-based EWS that uses last observation carried forward and normal-value imputation for missing values, to forecast clinical deterioration events, including unplanned ICU transfers, cardiac arrests, or death, up to 6 h in advance. Methods: We analyzed real-world data from 6039 patient encounters at Keimyung University Dongsan Hospital, Republic of Korea. Performance was evaluated under three scenarios: (1) using only vital signs and age, treating all other variables as missing; (2) reintroducing a full set of real-world clinical variables; and (3) imputing missing values drawn from a distribution within one standard deviation of the observed mean or using Multiple Imputation by Chained Equations (MICE). Results: VC-MAES achieved the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of 0.896 using only vital signs and age, outperforming traditional EWSs, including the National Early Warning Score (0.797) and the Modified Early Warning Score (0.722). Reintroducing full clinical variables improved the AUROC to 0.918, whereas mean-based imputation or MICE decreased the performance to 0.885 and 0.827, respectively. Conclusions: VC-MAES demonstrates robust predictive performance with limited inputs, outperforming traditional EWSs. Incorporating actual clinical data significantly improved accuracy. In contrast, mean-based or MICE imputation yielded poorer results than the default normal-value imputation, potentially due to disregarding the “informative presence” embedded in missing data patterns. These findings underscore the importance of understanding missingness patterns and employing imputation strategies that consider the decision-making context behind data availability to enhance model reliability.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3390/jcm14072213

Cites

24 of 25 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Care-process shifts, especially changes in test-ordering and documentation practices, can alter both feature availability and the meaning of missingness (informative missingness), which can affect deterioration-prediction performance even when underlying patient mix is relatively stable.

    “Care-process shifts – especially changes in test-ordering and documentation practices – can alter both feature availability and the meaning of missingness (“informative missingness”), which can affect deterioration-prediction performance even when underlying patient mix is relatively stable [11,12].”

    From Validation is not enough: Longitudinal evidence of post-deployment fragility in clinical AI systems (2026) · cites this paper as [11]

    Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sim, T., Hahn, S., Kim, K.-J., Cho, E.-Y., Jeong, Y., Kim, J.-H., Ha, E.-Y., Kim, I.-C., Park, S.-H., Cho, C.-H., Yu, G.-I., Cho, H., & Lee, K.-B.
Affiliations
  • AITRICS Corp., Seoul 06221, Republic of Korea
  • Yonsei University (KR)
  • Keimyung University Dongsan Medical Center (KR)
  • Keimyung University Daegu Dongsan Hospital (KR)
  • Keimyung University Dongsan Hospital (KR)
  • Department of Internal Medicine, Keimyung University Dongsan Hospital, Keimyung University School of Medicine, Daegu 42601, Republic of Korea
  • Hallym University Chuncheon Sacred Heart Hospital (KR)
Corresponding author
Lee, Ki-Byung
Venue
Journal of Clinical Medicine
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2025-03-24
Volume
14
Issue
7
Pages
2213
ISSN
2077-0383 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4408789659
Cited by
7
References
24
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 2
FWCI
2.81
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Clinical Medicine (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Ministry of Health and Welfare
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning in Healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Healthcare Technology and Patient Monitoring
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare
Keywords
early warning scores, missing data, missing data imputation, multiple imputation by chained equations, last observation carried forward, clinical deterioration prediction, National Early Warning Score, Modified Early Warning Score, vital signs, intensive care unit admission, cardiac arrest, mortality prediction, missingness patterns

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review