Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31933497›Full record

ArticleEducational and psychological measurement2020

Methodological Issues With Coding Participants in Anonymous Psychological Longitudinal Studies.

Lillian M Audette, Marie S Hammond, Natalie K Rochester

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Educational and psychological measurement, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing 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

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. A Versatile Semester-Long Course-Based Undergraduate Research Experience using Optogenetics and RNAi to Identify Genes Important for Synapse Function.Journal of undergraduate neuroscience education : JUNE : a publication of FUN, Faculty for Undergraduate Neuroscience · 2023
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. The Airman's Edge Project: A Peer-Based, Injury Prevention Approach to Preventing Military Suicide.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

3 authors.

Lillian M AudetteTennessee State University, Nashville, TN, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9928-8846
Marie S HammondTennessee State University, Nashville, TN, USA.
Natalie K RochesterTennessee State University, Nashville, TN, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Longitudinal studies are commonly used in the social and behavioral sciences to answer a wide variety of research questions. Longitudinal researchers often collect data anonymously from participants when studying sensitive topics to ensure that accurate information is provided. One difficulty gathering longitudinal anonymous data is that of correctly matching participants across waves of data collection. A number of methods have been proposed for using nonidentifying codes to match anonymous participants; however, currently there is no consensus on the most effective method. This article reviews and analyzes the literature on nonidentifying codes and provides recommendations for researchers interested in using these types of codes in conducting anonymous longitudinal studies.

Indexed as

anonymousbest practicesexperimental designlongitudinalresearch methodology

Identifiers

PMID31933497
PMCPMC6943988

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.