Swipe om te navigeren naar een ander artikel
The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s11136-007-9290-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Typical methods of analyzing data from clinical trials have shortcomings, notably comparisons of group means, use of change scores from pre- and post-treatment assessments, ignoring intervening assessments, and focusing on direct effects of treatment. A comparison of group means disregards the likelihood that individuals have different trajectories of change. Moreover, change scores ignore intervening assessments that may provide useful information about change. This paper compares results from traditional regression-based methods for analyzing data from a clinical trial (e.g., regression with change scores) with those of latent growth curve modeling (LGM).
LGM is a method that uses structural equation modeling techniques to model individual change, assess treatment effects and the relationship among multiple outcomes simultaneously, and model measurement error. The consequence is more precise parameter estimates while using data from all available time points.
Results demonstrate that LGM can yield stronger parameter estimates than the traditional regression-based approach and explain more variance in the outcome. In trials where there is a true effect, but it is non-significant or marginally significant using the traditional methods, LGM may provide evidence of this effect.
Analysts are encouraged to consider LGM as an additional and informative tool for analyzing clinical trial or other longitudinal data.
Log in om toegang te krijgen
Met onderstaand(e) abonnement(en) heeft u direct toegang:
Cronbach, L. J., & Furby, L. (1970). How should we measure ‘change’ - or should we? Psychological Bulletin, 74, 68–80. CrossRef
Rogossa, D. R. (1988). Myths about longitudinal research. In K. W. Schaie, R. T. Campbell, W. Meredith, & S. C. Rawlings (Eds.), Methodological issues in aging research (pp. 171–209). New York: Springer.
Rogossa, D. R. (1995). Myths and methods ‘Myths about longitudinal research’ plus supplemental questions. In J. M. Gottman (Ed.), The analysis of change (pp. 3–66). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Duncan T. E., & Duncan, S. C., et al. (2006). An introduction to latent variable growth curve modeling, (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Kreft, I., & De Leeuw, J. (1998). Introducing multilevel modeling. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Heck R., & Thomas, L. (2000). An introduction to multilevel modeling techniques. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models. Applications and data analysis methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Chou, C. P., & Bentler, P. M., et al. (1998). Comparisons of two statistical approaches to the study of growth curves: The multilevel model and latent curve analysis. Structural Equation Modeling, 5, 247–266. CrossRef
Li, F., & Duncan, T. E., et al. (2000). A didactic example of latent curve analysis applicable to the study of aging. Journal of Aging and Health, 12, 388–425. CrossRef
McArdle, J. J., & Bell, R. Q. (2000). Recent trends in modeling longitudinal data by latent growth curve methods. In T. D. Little, K. U. Schnabel, & J. Baumert (Eds.), Modeling longitudinal and multiple-group data: Practical issues, applied approaches, and scientific examples (pp. 69–108). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Muthen, B. O. (2002). Beyond SEM: General latent variable modeling. Behaviormetrika, 29, 81–117. CrossRef
Curren, P. J., & Willoughby, M. T. (2003). Implications of latent trajectory models for the study of developmental psychopathology. Development and Psychopathology, 15, 581–612. CrossRef
Singer, J. D., & Willett, J. B. (2003). Applied longitudinal data analysis: Modeling change and event occurrence. New York: Oxford University Press.
Bollen, K. A., & Curren, P. J. (2004). Autoregressive Latent Trajectory (ALT) models: A synthesis of two traditions. Sociological Methods and Research, 32, 336–383. CrossRef
Tomarken, A. J., & Waller, N. G. (2005). Structural equation modeling: Strengths, limitations, and misconceptions. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 1, 2.1–2.35. CrossRef
McArdle, J. J., & Epstein, D. (1988). Dynamic but structural equation modeling of repeated measures data. In R. B. Cattell & J. Nesselroade (Eds.), Handbook of multivariate experimental psychology (pp. 561–614). New York: Plenum.
Meredith, W., & Tisak, J. (1990). Latent curve analysis. Psychometrika, 55, 107–122. CrossRef
Rao, C. R. (1958). Some statistical methods for comparison of growth curves. Biometrics, 14, 1–17. CrossRef
Tucker, L. R. (1958). Determination of parameters of a functional relation by factor analysis. Psychometrika, 23, 19–23. CrossRef
Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling, (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford.
Jackson, D. L. (2003). Revisiting sample size and number of parameter estimates: Some support for the N:q hypothesis. Structural Equation Modeling, 10, 128–141. CrossRef
MacCallum, R. C., & Browne, M. W., et al. (1996). Power analysis and determination of sample size for covariance structure modeling. Psychological Methods, 1, 131–149. CrossRef
Schumacker, R. E., & Lomax, R. G. (1996). A beginner’s guide to structural equation modeling. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Kaplan, D. (2000). Structural equation modeling. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
West, S. G., & Finch, J. F., et al. (1995). Structural equation models with nonnormal variables: Problems and remedies. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues, and applications (pp. 56–75). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Hox, J., & Bechger, T. (1998). An introduction to structural equation modeling. Family Science Review, 11, 354–373.
Chou, C. P., & Bentler, P. M. (1995). Estimates and tests in structural equation modeling. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues, and applications (pp. 37–55). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
SOLVD Investigators. (1990). Studies of left ventricular dysfunction (SOLVD)–rationale, design and methods: Two trials that evaluate the effect of enalapril in patients with reduced ejection fraction. The American Journal of Cardiology, 66, 315–322. CrossRef
SOLVD Investigators. (1991). Effect of enalapril on survival in patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fractions and congestive heart failure. The New England Journal of Medicine, 325, 293–302. CrossRef
Clarke, S. P., & Frasure-Smith, N., et al. (2000). Psychosocial factors as predictors of functional status at 1 year in patients with left ventricular dysfunction. Research in Nursing and Health, 23, 293–300.
Kosloski, K., & Stull, D. E., et al. (2005). Longitudinal analysis of the reciprocal effects of self-assessed global health and depressive symptoms. The Journal of Gerontology B. Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 60(6), P296–P303.
Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136–162). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Marsh, H. W., & Hau, K. T., et al. (2004). In Search of Golden Rules: Comment on hypothesis-testing approaches to setting cutoff values for fit indexes and dangers in overgeneralizing Hu and Bentler’s (1999) findings. Structural Equation Modeling, 11, 320–341. CrossRef
Bollen, K., & Curran, P. (2006). Latent curve models: A structural equation perspective. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Duncan, T. E., & Duncan, S. C., et al. (2006). An introduction to latent variable growth curve modeling. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1998). Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: Sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification. Psychological Methods, 3, 424–453. CrossRef
Wothke, W. (2000). Longitudinal and multi-group modeling with missing data. In T. D. Little, K. U. Schnabel, & J. Baumert (Eds.), Modeling longitudinal and multilevel data: Practical issues, applied approaches, and specific examples. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Joreskog, K. G. (1993). Testing structural equation models. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 294–316). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
- Analyzing growth and change: latent variable growth curve modeling with an application to clinical trials
Donald E. Stull
- Springer Netherlands