ArticleStructural equation modeling : a multidisciplinary journal2026
Dynamic Modeling with Intensive Longitudinal Data: One-Step and Two-Step DSEM Approaches.
Article in Structural equation modeling : a multidisciplinary journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study evaluated and compared one-step and two-step dynamic structural equation modeling (DSEM) approaches for analyzing intensive longitudinal data. In one-step DSEM, the within-person dynamic model and the between-person model are estimated simultaneously. In two-step DSEM, dynamic component estimates are first extracted from the within-person model, followed by estimation of between-person relations in a second step. We further examined whether including person-level variables as auxiliary variables in the first step affects the performance of two-step DSEM. The modeling approaches were evaluated by a simulation study and illustrated with a real data example. Results showed that two-step DSEM without auxiliary variables exhibited estimation bias, low coverage rates, and deflated Type I error rates. In contrast, one-step DSEM and two-step DSEM with auxiliary variables yielded satisfactory results when sufficient data were available (e.g., ≥ 30 time points and ≥ 100 individuals). Implications, modeling recommendations, and future research directions were discussed.
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.