Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28845097›Full record

ArticleStructural equation modeling : a multidisciplinary journal2017

Comparing models of change to estimate the mediated effect in the pretest-posttest control group design.

Matthew J Valente, David P MacKinnon

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Structural equation modeling : a multidisciplinary journal, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 60 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
60citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

60 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Matthew J ValenteArizona State University.
David P MacKinnonArizona State University.

Funding

Estimating Mediation Effects in Prevention StudiesR37DA009757 · NIDA · ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY-TEMPE CAMPUS · PI MACKINNON, DAVID P · 2015 to 2024
$3.5M
Modern Longitudinal Mediation Methods for Prevention StudiesF31DA043317 · NIDA · ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY-TEMPE CAMPUS · PI VALENTE, MATTHEW JOHN · 2017 to 2018
$65k
NIDA NIH HHS F31 DA043317NIDA NIH HHS R37 DA009757
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Models to assess mediation in the pretest-posttest control group design are understudied in the behavioral sciences even though it is the design of choice for evaluating experimental manipulations. The paper provides analytical comparisons of the four most commonly used models used to estimate the mediated effect in this design: Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA), difference score, residualized change score, and cross-sectional model. Each of these models are fitted using a Latent Change Score specification and a simulation study assessed bias, Type I error, power, and confidence interval coverage of the four models. All but the ANCOVA model make stringent assumptions about the stability and cross-lagged relations of the mediator and outcome that may not be plausible in real-world applications. When these assumptions do not hold, Type I error and statistical power results suggest that only the ANCOVA model has good performance. The four models are applied to an empirical example.

Indexed as

longitudinal mediationmediationposttest designpretesttwo-waves

Identifiers

PMID28845097
PMCPMC5568008

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.