ArticleStructural equation modeling : a multidisciplinary journal2021
Effect of Parameterization on Statistical Power and Effect Size Estimation in Latent Growth Modeling.
Article in Structural equation modeling : a multidisciplinary journal, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Pain during midlife: a cross-national analysis of cohort differences in reports of pain in the United States, Europe, South Korea, and Mexico.American journal of epidemiology · 2026Article
- Historical change in midlife trajectories of self-reported sensory functioning across 16 nations.The Gerontologist · 2026Article
- Uncovering mechanisms of historical change in midlife loneliness across the United States and Europe: a focus on physical activity, health conditions, and wealth.The journals of gerontology. Series B, Psychological sciences and social sciences · 2026Article
- Midlife blues: A lifespan perspective on midlife depressive symptoms.Psychology and aging · 2025Article
- Trajectories of episodic memory in midlife: Historical change from a cross-country perspective.Psychology and aging · 2025Article
- Regression-Equivalent Effect Sizes for Latent Growth Modeling and Associated Null Hypothesis Significance Tests.Structural equation modeling : a multidisciplinary journal · 2023Article
- Loneliness in midlife: Historical increases and elevated levels in the United States compared with Europe.The American psychologistArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
The difference between groups in their random slopes is frequently examined in latent growth modeling to evaluate treatment efficacy. However, when end centering is used for model parameterization with a randomized design, the difference in the random intercepts is the model-estimated mean difference between the groups at the end of the study, which has the same expected value as the product of the coefficient for the slope difference and study duration. A Monte Carlo study found that (a) the statistical power to detect the treatment effect was greater when determined from the intercept instead of the slope difference, and (b) the standard error of the model-estimated mean difference was smaller when obtained from the intercept difference. Investigators may reduce Type II errors by comparing groups in random intercepts instead of random slopes to test treatment effects, and should therefore conduct power assessments using end centering to detect each difference.
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.