Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29755377›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2018

Precision, Reliability, and Effect Size of Slope Variance in Latent Growth Curve Models: Implications for Statistical Power Analysis.

Andreas M Brandmaier, Timo von Oertzen, Paolo Ghisletta, Ulman Lindenberger, Christopher Hertzog

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Improving statistical reporting in psychology.Communications psychology · 2025
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Differential Longitudinal Associations Between Domains of Cognitive Function and Physical Function: A 20-Year Follow-Up Study.The journals of gerontology. Series B, Psychological sciences and social sciences · 2024
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

5 authors.

Andreas M BrandmaierCenter for Lifespan Psychology, Max Planck Institute for Human Development, Berlin, Germany.
Timo von OertzenCenter for Lifespan Psychology, Max Planck Institute for Human Development, Berlin, Germany.
Paolo GhislettaFaculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.
Ulman LindenbergerCenter for Lifespan Psychology, Max Planck Institute for Human Development, Berlin, Germany.
Christopher HertzogSchool of Psychology, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Latent Growth Curve Models (LGCM) have become a standard technique to model change over time. Prediction and explanation of inter-individual differences in change are major goals in lifespan research. The major determinants of statistical power to detect individual differences in change are the magnitude of true inter-individual differences in linear change (LGCM slope variance), design precision, alpha level, and sample size. Here, we show that design precision can be expressed as the inverse of

Indexed as

effective erroreffect sizelinear latent growth curve modellongitudinal study designreliabilitystatistical powerstructural equation modeling

Identifiers

PMID29755377
PMCPMC5932409

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.