ArticleBMC medical research methodology2023
Detecting influential subjects in intensive longitudinal data using mixed-effects location scale models.
Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- A pilot self-coach alignment audit in NCAA collegiate rowers: field feasibility, null findings, and design-sensitivity analysis for future self-verification research.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2026Article
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
Abstract
backgroundCollection of intensive longitudinal health outcomes allows joint modeling of their mean (location) and variability (scale). Focusing on the location of the outcome, measures to detect influential subjects in longitudinal data using standard mixed-effects regression models (MRMs) have been widely discussed. However, no existing approach enables the detection of subjects that heavily influence the scale of the outcome.
methodsWe propose applying mixed-effects location scale (MELS) modeling combined with commonly used influence measures such as Cook's distance and DFBETAS to fill this gap. In this paper, we provide a framework for researchers to follow when trying to detect influential subjects for both the scale and location of the outcome. The framework allows detailed examination of each subject's influence on model fit as well as point estimates and precision of coefficients in different components of a MELS model.
resultsWe simulated two common scenarios in longitudinal healthcare studies and found that influence measures in our framework successfully capture influential subjects over 99% of the time. We also re-analyzed data from a health behavior study and found 4 particularly influential subjects, among which two cannot be detected by influence analyses via regular MRMs.
conclusionThe proposed framework can help researchers detect influential subject(s) that will be otherwise overlooked by influential analysis using regular MRMs and analyze all data in one model despite influential subjects.
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.