SafeImpute: Reliable Clinical Data Imputation via Conformal Selection

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2607.05613v1
• Date: Mon, 06 Jul 2026 20:16:21 GMT
• Title: SafeImpute: Reliable Clinical Data Imputation via Conformal Selection
• Abstract summary: Clinical care often relies on key laboratory indicators, yet real-world patient visits are sparse and tests are ordered irregularly.<n>We study reliable clinical imputation, aiming to produce accurate imputations while selectively releasing the reliable results.<n>We propose SafeImpute, a reliable imputation framework for irregular and sparse clinical longitudinal records.
• Score: 35.40404498771435
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Clinical care often relies on key laboratory indicators, yet real-world patient visits are sparse and tests are ordered irregularly, leading to pervasive missingness. While many imputation methods improve average accuracy, they provide limited guidance on which imputed values are reliable enough for high-stakes downstream use. In this work, we study reliable clinical imputation, aiming to produce accurate imputations while selectively releasing the reliable results, with statistical control over clinically unacceptable errors. To achieve this goal, we propose SafeImpute, a reliable imputation framework for irregular and sparse clinical longitudinal records. SafeImpute constructs an event graph that captures both intra-patient temporal trajectories and inter-patient clinical similarity, and learns imputations with a two-relation GNN and adaptive fusion, regularized by an auxiliary masked reconstruction objective. For reliability guarantees, SafeImpute converts a proxy risk score into conformal p-values and applies the Benjamini--Hochberg procedure to control the false discovery rate (FDR) of unacceptable errors among released imputations at a user-specified tolerance. Experiments on our Mayo Clinic data, the public MIMIC-III and MIMIC-IV datasets show that SafeImpute achieves strong imputation accuracy while providing reliable error control, outperforming diverse baselines in both standard imputation evaluation and FDR-controlled selective-release evaluation.

Related papers

• CRS-Triage: Confidence- and Reliability-Aware Selective Triage under Incomplete Clinical Evidence [2.5399727721692624]
  Emergency triage requires reliable decisions within a short time period.<n> EHR data, including structured data and clinical text, are often incomplete, unreliable, and inconsistent.<n>We propose confidence- and reliability-aware selective triage (CRS-Triage) to predict patients' acuity levels.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-04T16:04:15Z)
• Beyond Scalar Scores: Exploring LLM-based Metrics for Clinical Significance Evaluation in Radiology Reports [49.5225801722164]
  Existing metrics obscure this requirement by reducing report quality to a medically ungrounded scalar.<n>We study this boundary using ReEvalMed benchmark as testbed and evaluate metric-level clinical significance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-17T08:10:30Z)
• RISED: A Pre-Deployment Safety Evaluation Framework for Clinical AI Decision-Support Systems [0.0]
  We propose a five-dimension pre-deployment evaluation covering Reliability, Inclusivity, Sensitivity, Equity, and Deployability.<n> RISED is released as an open-source Python package that supplies the quantitative verdicts existing clinical AI reporting standards require.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-13T02:17:13Z)
• Towards Trustworthy Depression Estimation via Disentangled Evidential Learning [50.22167852149165]
  We propose EviDep, an evidential learning framework that jointly quantifies depression severity.<n>EviDep enforces strict information integrity to guarantee robust evidence synthesis.<n>It achieves state-of-the-art predictive accuracy and superior uncertainty calibration, delivering a robust fail-safe mechanism for trustworthy clinical screening.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-17T13:27:11Z)
• Guideline-Grounded Evidence Accumulation for High-Stakes Agent Verification [60.18369393468405]
  Existing verifiers usually underperform owing to a lack of domain knowledge and limited calibration.<n>GLEAN compiles expert-curated protocols into trajectory-informed, well-calibrated correctness signals.<n>We empirically validate GLEAN with agentic clinical diagnosis across three diseases from the MIMIC-IV dataset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-03T09:36:43Z)
• Calibrated Bayesian Deep Learning for Explainable Decision Support Systems Based on Medical Imaging [6.826979426009301]
  It is imperative that models quantify uncertainty in a manner that correlates with prediction correctness, allowing clinicians to identify unreliable outputs for further review.<n>The present paper proposes a generalizable probabilistic optimization framework grounded in Bayesian deep learning.<n>Specifically, a novel Confidence-Uncertainty Boundary Loss (CUB-Loss) is introduced that imposes penalties on high-certainty errors and low-certainty correct predictions.<n>The proposed framework is validated on three distinct medical imaging tasks: automatic screening of pneumonia, diabetic retinopathy detection, and identification of skin lesions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-12T14:03:41Z)
• Conformal Lesion Segmentation for 3D Medical Images [82.92159832699583]
  We propose a risk-constrained framework that calibrates data-driven thresholds via conformalization to ensure the test-time FNR remains below a target tolerance.<n>We validate the statistical soundness and predictive performance of CLS on six 3D-LS datasets across five backbone models, and conclude with actionable insights for deploying risk-aware segmentation in clinical practice.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-19T08:21:00Z)
• A Fully Automatic Framework for Intracranial Pressure Grading: Integrating Keyframe Identification, ONSD Measurement and Clinical Data [3.6652537579778106]
  Intracranial pressure (ICP) elevation poses severe threats to cerebral function, thus necessitating monitoring for timely intervention.<n>We introduce a fully automatic two-stage framework for ICP grading, integrating ONSD measurement and clinical data.<n>Our method achieves a validation accuracy of $0.845 pm 0.071$ and an independent test accuracy of 0.786, significantly outperforming conventional threshold-based method.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-11T11:37:48Z)
• Towards Trustworthy Vital Sign Forecasting: Leveraging Uncertainty for Prediction Intervals [32.233133404873016]
  We present two methods for deriving PIs from the Reconstruction Uncertainty Estimate (RUE), an uncertainty measure well-suited to vital-sign forecasting.<n>We evaluate these methods on two large public datasets with minute- and hour-level sampling, representing high- and low-frequency health signals.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-01T10:03:26Z)
• COIN: Uncertainty-Guarding Selective Question Answering for Foundation Models with Provable Risk Guarantees [51.5976496056012]
  COIN is an uncertainty-guarding selection framework that calibrates statistically valid thresholds to filter a single generated answer per question.<n>COIN estimates the empirical error rate on a calibration set and applies confidence interval methods to establish a high-probability upper bound on the true error rate.<n>We demonstrate COIN's robustness in risk control, strong test-time power in retaining admissible answers, and predictive efficiency under limited calibration data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-25T07:04:49Z)
• Towards Reliable Medical Image Segmentation by Modeling Evidential Calibrated Uncertainty [57.023423137202485]
  Concerns regarding the reliability of medical image segmentation persist among clinicians.<n>We introduce DEviS, an easily implementable foundational model that seamlessly integrates into various medical image segmentation networks.<n>By leveraging subjective logic theory, we explicitly model probability and uncertainty for medical image segmentation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-01-01T05:02:46Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.