Trial reportJournal of the experimental analysis of behavior2019
A Monte Carlo method for comparing generalized estimating equations to conventional statistical techniques for discounting data.
Trial report in Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- "I Can't Afford the Copays, So Guess I'll Die?" Using Discounting Methodology to Quantify How Cost Affects Health-Care Utilization.Behavior and social issues · 2024Article
- Racial differences in early adolescent substance use: Child abuse types and family/peer substance use as predictors.Journal of ethnicity in substance abuse · 2024Article
- The Impact of Sex, Body Mass Index, Age, Exercise Type and Exercise Duration on Interstitial Glucose Levels during Exercise.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Hyperbolic modeling and assessment of hypothetical health behaviors during a viral outbreak using crowdsourced samples.Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior · 2023Article
- Monte Carlo Analyses for Single-Case Experimental Designs: An Untapped Resource for Applied Behavioral Researchers and Practitioners.Perspectives on behavior science · 2022Article
- Influence of cataract surgery on macular vascular density in patients with myopia using optical coherence tomography angiography.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2020Article
- Comparison of delay discounting of different outcomes in cigarette smokers, smokeless tobacco users, e-cigarette users, and non-tobacco users.Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior · 2020Article
- Editorial: Behavior Science for the Public Welfare.Perspectives on behavior science · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Discounting is the process by which outcomes lose value. Much of discounting research has focused on differences in the degree of discounting across various groups. This research has relied heavily on conventional null hypothesis significance tests that are familiar to psychologists, such as t-tests and ANOVAs. As discounting research questions have become more complex by simultaneously focusing on within-subject and between-group differences, conventional statistical testing is often not appropriate for the obtained data. Generalized estimating equations (GEE) are one type of mixed-effects model that are designed to handle autocorrelated data, such as within-subject repeated-measures data, and are therefore more appropriate for discounting data. To determine if GEE provides similar results as conventional statistical tests, we compared the techniques across 2,000 simulated data sets. The data sets were created using a Monte Carlo method based on an existing data set. Across the simulated data sets, the GEE and the conventional statistical tests generally provided similar patterns of results. As the GEE and more conventional statistical tests provide the same pattern of result, we suggest researchers use the GEE because it was designed to handle data that has the structure that is typical of discounting data.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.