Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30611576›Full record

ArticleAddictive behaviors2019

Statistical methods for evaluating the correlation between timeline follow-back data and daily process data with applications to research on alcohol and marijuana use.

Wanjun Liu, Runze Li, Marc A Zimmerman, Maureen A Walton, Rebecca M Cunningham, Anne Buu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Addictive behaviors, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

6 authors.

Wanjun LiuDepartment of Statistics and the Methodology Center, Pennsylvania State University, 413 Thomas Building University Park, PA 16802-2111, USA. Electronic address: wxl204@psu.edu.
Runze LiDepartment of Statistics and the Methodology Center, Pennsylvania State University, 413 Thomas Building University Park, PA 16802-2111, USA. Electronic address: rzli@psu.edu.
Marc A ZimmermanDepartment of Health Behavior and Health Education & Injury Center, University of Michigan, 1415 Washington Heights, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA. Electronic address: marcz@umich.edu.
Maureen A WaltonAddiction Center & Injury Center, University of Michigan, 4250 Plymouth Road, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA. Electronic address: waltonma@umich.edu.
Rebecca M CunninghamDepartment of Emergency Medicine & Injury Center, University of Michigan, 2800 Plymouth Rd, Bldg 10-G080, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA. Electronic address: stroh@med.umich.edu.
Anne BuuDepartment of Health Behavior and Biological Sciences, University of Michigan, 400 North Ingalls, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA. Electronic address: buu@umich.edu.

Funding

Southeast Asia Malaria Research CenterU19AI089672 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA · PI CUI, LIWANG · 2010 to 2023
$28.9M
Pilot, Mentoring, and Professional Development CoreP50DA039838 · NIDA · PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY, THE · PI LI, RUNZE · 2015 to 2019
$13.9M
Measurement and Methodology for Daily Patterns of Drug Use and Related BehaviorsR01DA035183 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI BUU, YUH-PEY ANNE, CUNNINGHAM, REBECCA M. · 2013 to 2017
$2.6M
Penn State Biomedical Big Data to Knowledge (B2D2K) Training ProgramT32LM012415 · NLM · PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY, THE · PI BROACH, JAMES R., HONAVAR, VASANT G. · 2016 to 2020
$1.2M
NIAID NIH HHS U19 AI089672NIDA NIH HHS P50 DA039838NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA035183NLM NIH HHS T32 LM012415
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRetrospective timeline follow-back (TLFB) data and prospective daily process data have been frequently collected in addiction research to characterize behavioral patterns. Although previous validity studies have demonstrated high correlations between these two types of data, the conventional method adopted in those studies was based on summary measures that may lose critical information and the Pearson's correlation coefficient that has an undesirable property. This study proposes the functional concordance correlation coefficient to address these issues.

methodsWe use real data collected from a randomized experiment to demonstrate the applications of the proposed method and compare its analytical results with those of the conventional method. We also conduct a simulation study based on the real data to evaluate the level of overestimation associated with the conventional method.

resultsThe results of the real data example indicate that the correlation between these two types of data varies across substances (alcohol vs. marijuana) and assessment schedules (daily vs. weekly). Additionally, the correlations estimated by the conventional method tend to be higher than those estimated by the proposed method. The simulation results further show that the magnitude of overestimation associated with the conventional method is greatest when the true correlation is medium.

conclusionsThe findings of the real data example imply that daily assessments are particularly beneficial for characterizing more variable behaviors like alcohol use, whereas weekly assessments may be sufficient for low variation events such as marijuana use. The proposed method is a better approach for evaluating the validity of TLFB data.

Indexed as

Correlation of DataData Interpretation, StatisticalModels, StatisticalAdolescentAdultAlcohol DrinkingData AnalysisEpidemiologic StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMarijuana UseRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicReproducibility of ResultsYoung AdultConcordance correlation coefficientDaily processFunctional dataSummary measureTimeline follow-back

Identifiers

PMID30611576
PMCPMC6544482

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.