ArticleBMC medical research methodology2020
Nothing wrong about change: the adequate choice of the dependent variable and design in prediction of cognitive training success.
Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Changes in Stress Following Wage Increases for Early Childhood Educators.Early childhood education journal · 2025Article
- Sleep and circadian rhythm disturbances as risk and progression factors for multiple chronic overlapping pain conditions: a protocol for a longitudinal study.Pain reports · 2024Article
- The change of working alliance and the association to treatment outcome in an internet-based therapy after pregnancy loss.BMC psychology · 2024Article
- Psychological impact of COVID-19 on the Ecuadorian population: a comparative analysis 1 year after quarantine measures.Frontiers in psychology · 2024Article
- Medium- and Long-Term Effects of Insomnia Severity and Circadian Preference on Pain and Emotional Distress Among Individuals With Chronic Pain.The journal of pain · 2023Article
- Using the Personalized Advantage Index to determine which veterans may benefit from more vs. less comprehensive intensive PTSD treatment programs.European journal of psychotraumatology · 2023Article
- The moderating effects of sex, age, and education on the outcome of combined cognitive training and transcranial electrical stimulation in older adults.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
- Predictors of activities of daily living in heathy older adults: Who benefits most from online cognitive training?Brain and behavior · 2021Article
- Predictors of changes after reasoning training in healthy adults.Brain and behavior · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEven though investigating predictors of intervention success (e.g Cognitive Training, CT) is gaining more and more interest in the light of an individualized medicine, results on specific predictors of intervention success in the overall field are mixed and inconsistent due to different and sometimes inappropriate statistical methods used. Therefore, the present paper gives a guidance on the appropriate use of multiple regression analyses to identify predictors of CT and similar non-pharmacological interventions.
methodsWe simulated data based on a predefined true model and ran a series of different analyses to evaluate their performance in retrieving the true model coefficients. The true model consisted of a 2 (between: experimental vs. control group) × 2 (within: pre- vs. post-treatment) design with two continuous predictors, one of which predicted the success in the intervention group and the other did not. In analyzing the data, we considered four commonly used dependent variables (post-test score, absolute change score, relative change score, residual score), five regression models, eight sample sizes, and four levels of reliability.
resultsOur results indicated that a regression model including the investigated predictor, Group (experimental vs. control), pre-test score, and the interaction between the investigated predictor and the Group as predictors, and the absolute change score as the dependent variable seemed most convenient for the given experimental design. Although the pre-test score should be included as a predictor in the regression model for reasons of statistical power, its coefficient should not be interpreted because even if there is no true relationship, a negative and statistically significant regression coefficient commonly emerges.
conclusionEmploying simulation methods, theoretical reasoning, and mathematical derivations, we were able to derive recommendations regarding the analysis of data in one of the most prevalent experimental designs in research on CT and external predictors of CT success. These insights can contribute to the application of considered data analyses in future studies and facilitate cumulative knowledge gain.
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.