Advertisement

 

 

Missing Value Imputation Approach for Mass Spectrometry-based Metabolomics Data.

Missing Value Imputation Approach for Mass Spectrometry-based Metabolomics Data.
Author Information (click to view)

Wei R, Wang J, Su M, Jia E, Chen S, Chen T, Ni Y,


Wei R, Wang J, Su M, Jia E, Chen S, Chen T, Ni Y, (click to view)

Wei R, Wang J, Su M, Jia E, Chen S, Chen T, Ni Y,

Advertisement
Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedIn

Scientific reports 2018 01 128(1) 663 doi 10.1038/s41598-017-19120-0
Abstract

Missing values exist widely in mass-spectrometry (MS) based metabolomics data. Various methods have been applied for handling missing values, but the selection can significantly affect following data analyses. Typically, there are three types of missing values, missing not at random (MNAR), missing at random (MAR), and missing completely at random (MCAR). Our study comprehensively compared eight imputation methods (zero, half minimum (HM), mean, median, random forest (RF), singular value decomposition (SVD), k-nearest neighbors (kNN), and quantile regression imputation of left-censored data (QRILC)) for different types of missing values using four metabolomics datasets. Normalized root mean squared error (NRMSE) and NRMSE-based sum of ranks (SOR) were applied to evaluate imputation accuracy. Principal component analysis (PCA)/partial least squares (PLS)-Procrustes analysis were used to evaluate the overall sample distribution. Student’s t-test followed by correlation analysis was conducted to evaluate the effects on univariate statistics. Our findings demonstrated that RF performed the best for MCAR/MAR and QRILC was the favored one for left-censored MNAR. Finally, we proposed a comprehensive strategy and developed a public-accessible web-tool for the application of missing value imputation in metabolomics ( https://metabolomics.cc.hawaii.edu/software/MetImp/ ).

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

13 − two =

[ HIDE/SHOW ]