Search arXiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2607.25775

Calculating the Expected Value of Sample Information accounting for missing data

Luca Benetti·Gianluca Baio·Anna Heath
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

The Expected Value of Sample Information (EVSI) is a powerful instrument to determine the value of additional evidence to inform an economic model. However, EVSI has been applied only to idealized data collection mechanisms, thereby reducing its potential applications in realistic studies. In this paper, we define a methodology to calculate EVSI when the additional evidence we aim to collect exhibits missing data; a very common challenge in real-world studies. First, we define how to simulate individual-level data and how to induce missingness inside the simulated data. We will reproduce Missing Completely At Random (MCAR), Missing At Random (MAR), and Missing Not At Random (MNAR) missing data mechanisms. Then, we will apply the multiple imputation method to adjust for the bias related to the missing data. Finally, we use the imputed data to compute the EVSI using nonparametric regression methods. We apply the novel methodology to two different health economic models and compare the EVSI computed on data without missingness with the EVSI with different types of missing data. We show that the EVSI decreases when the additional evidence suffers from missingness, and therefore, we define a method to efficiently compute the sample size we need to collect to recover the idealized EVSI (without missingness). We find out that the number of additional samples needed to correct for missing data exceeds that coming from standard approaches. With this methodology, we compute EVSI when the additional data are affected by non-trivial forms of missingness, modeling both the MAR and MNAR mechanisms, and extending EVSI calculation to more realistic scenarios. The fact that the necessary sample size to recover the idealized EVSI exceeds that of standard methods suggests that this methodology potentially represents a novel technique for sample size calculation in realistic studies.

Explore related subjects

stat.MEstat.AP

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Luca Benetti, Gianluca Baio, Anna Heath. 2026-07-28. Calculating the Expected Value of Sample Information accounting for missing data. https://arxiv.org/abs/2607.25775

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Bias-Correction for Privacy-Protected Spatial Autoregressive Models with Application to Restaurant Network Analysis

Spatial autoregressive (SAR) models and their extensions are important tools for studying network effects. However, with an increasing emphasis on data privacy, data providers often implement protection measures that render standard SAR models inapplicable. In this study, we introduce a privacy-protected SAR model that incorporates noise into both the response and covariates to meet privacy requirements. With noise present in both components, the traditional quasi-maximum likelihood estimator becomes difficult to compute because the likelihood function cannot be directly formulated. To bypass this hurdle, we begin with a pseudo-likelihood approach, initially omitting the noise in the covariates. A Newton-Raphson algorithm is then applied to compute the estimator; however, the estimator is biased. To address this, we propose a bias-corrected Newton-Raphson-type algorithm that simultaneously accounts for noise in both the response and covariates. We further show, under appropriate regularity conditions, that the resulting estimator is consistent and asymptotically normal. To further enhance computational efficiency, we also develop a bias-corrected least squares estimator. Several extensions are discussed, and the finite-sample performance of the proposed methods is evaluated through extensive simulations. We apply the proposed methodology to restaurant transaction data from a third-party payment platform. Our method identifies a statistically significant competitive network effect among restaurants and further reveals meaningful restaurant-customer interaction patterns.

stat.ME↗
arXiv2026

A variational framework for modal estimation

Multivariate mode estimation arises in many statistical problems such as inverse problems, multimodal sampling, and density-based clustering, but becomes challenging in moderate to high dimensions, especially when the underlying density is not directly evaluable. We introduce GERVE (Gibbs-measure Entropy-Regularized Variational Estimation), a sample-based method for estimating multivariate modes by approximating Gibbs distributions directly from samples, without estimating or evaluating the density. GERVE uses Gaussian-mixture variational annealing and natural-gradient optimization, producing a mixture concentrated in high-density regions whose component responsibilities also provide a clustering of the observations. We prove theoretical guarantees in two regimes: as the Gibbs temperature goes to zero, the optimal variational mixture concentrates around the global modes of the population density; at fixed positive temperature, we prove existence, consistency, and asymptotic normality of empirical maximizers and propose a bootstrap procedure for uncertainty quantification. Simulations and a real-data experiment show that GERVE accurately recovers modes and produces meaningful clusters.

stat.ME↗
arXiv2026

Objective Model Prior Probabilities in Variable Selection

For many years it was routine to use equal model prior probabilities in Bayesian model uncertainty analysis. At least twenty years ago it became clear that this was problematic, leading to support of much too large models in the increasingly huge model spaces being considered in genomics and other fields. A popular replacement was to adopt a suggestion of Harold Jeffreys for the variable selection problem in which a total of $k$ possible variables are being considered for inclusion in the model: give the collection of all models containing $d$ variables ($d = 0, . . . , k$) prior probability $1/(k + 1)$ and then divide this prior probability equally among the models in the collection. Many other choices of model prior probabilities that impose severe parsimony have also been introduced. We begin by reviewing the problems with using equal model prior probabilities and then discuss some serious problems with the Jeffreys choice. Finally, we introduce and study a number of objective alternative choices of model prior probabilities, from both numerical and theoretical perspectives.

stat.ME↗