Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38495479›Full record

SynthesisTheScientificWorldJournal2024

Application of Hierarchical/Multilevel Models and Quality of Reporting (2010-2020): A Systematic Review.

Killian Asampana Asosega, Atinuke Olusola Adebanji, Eric Nimako Aidoo, Ellis Owusu-Dabo

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in TheScientificWorldJournal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

4 authors.

Killian Asampana AsosegaDepartment of Statistics and Actuarial Science, Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology, Kumasi, Ghana.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3140-2649
Atinuke Olusola AdebanjiDepartment of Statistics and Actuarial Science, Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology, Kumasi, Ghana.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1239-6423
Eric Nimako AidooDepartment of Statistics and Actuarial Science, Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology, Kumasi, Ghana.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2663-6747
Ellis Owusu-DaboDepartment of Global and International Health, Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology, Kumasi, Ghana.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4232-4292

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Multilevel models have gained immense popularity across almost every discipline due to the presence of hierarchy in most data and phenomena. In this paper, we present a systematic review on the adoption and application of multilevel models and the important information reported on the results generated from the use of these models. Methods: The review was performed by searching Google Scholar for original research articles on the application of multilevel models published between 2010 and 2020. The search strategy involved topics such as "multilevel models," "hierarchical linear models," and "mixed models with hierarchy." The search placed more emphasis on the application of hierarchical models in any discipline but excluded software methodological development and related articles. Results: A total of 121 articles were initially obtained from the search results. However, 65 articles met the inclusion criteria for the review. Out of the 65 articles reviewed, 46.2% were related to health/epidemiology, 15.4% to education and psychology, and 16.9% to social life. The majority of the articles (78.5%) were two-level models, and most of these studies modelled univariate responses. However, the few that modelled more than one response modelled them separately. Moreover, 83.1% were cross-sectional design, and 9.2% and 6.2% were longitudinal and repeated measures, respectively. Moreover, a little over half (55.4%) of articles reported on the intraclass correlation measure, and all articles indicated the response variable distribution where most (47.7%) were normally distributed. Only 58.5% of articles reported on the estimation methods used as Bayesian (20%) and MLE (18.5%). Again, model validation measures and statistical software were reported in 70.8% and 90.8% articles, respectively. Conclusion: There is an increase in the utilization of multilevel modelling in the last decade, which could be attributed to the presence of clustered and hierarchically correlated data structures. There is a need for improvement in the area of measurement and reporting on the intraclass correlation, parameter estimation, and variable selection measures to further improve the quality of the application of multilevel models. The integration of spatial effects into multilevel models is very limited and needs to be explored in the future.

Identifiers

PMID38495479
PMCPMC10942821

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.