Cargando…

Performance of mixed effects models in the analysis of mediated longitudinal data

BACKGROUND: Linear mixed effects models (LMMs) are a common approach for analyzing longitudinal data in a variety of settings. Although LMMs may be applied to complex data structures, such as settings where mediators are present, it is unclear whether they perform well relative to methods for mediat...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Blood, Emily A, Cabral, Howard, Heeren, Timothy, Cheng, Debbie M
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2010
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2842282/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20170503
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-10-16
_version_ 1782179188566917120
author Blood, Emily A
Cabral, Howard
Heeren, Timothy
Cheng, Debbie M
author_facet Blood, Emily A
Cabral, Howard
Heeren, Timothy
Cheng, Debbie M
author_sort Blood, Emily A
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Linear mixed effects models (LMMs) are a common approach for analyzing longitudinal data in a variety of settings. Although LMMs may be applied to complex data structures, such as settings where mediators are present, it is unclear whether they perform well relative to methods for mediational analyses such as structural equation models (SEMs), which have obvious appeal in such settings. For some researchers, SEMs may be more difficult than LMMs to implement, e.g. due to lack of training in the methodology or the need for specialized SEM software. It therefore is of interest to evaluate whether the LMM performs sufficiently in a scenario particularly suitable for SEMs. We focus on evaluation of the total effect (i.e. direct and indirect) of an exposure on an outcome of interest when a mediating factor is present. Our aim is to explore whether the LMM performs as well as the SEM in a setting that is conducive to using the SEM. METHODS: We simulated mediated longitudinal data from an SEM where a binary, main independent variable has both direct and indirect effects on a continuous outcome. We conducted analyses with both the LMM and SEM to evaluate the performance of the LMM in a setting where the SEM is expected to be preferable. Models were evaluated with respect to bias, coverage probability and power. Sample size, effect size and error distribution of the simulated data were varied. RESULTS: Both models performed well in a range of settings. Marginal increases in power estimates were observed for the SEM, although generally there were no major differences in performance. Power for both models was good with a sample of size of 250 and a small to medium effect size. Bias did not substantially increase for either model when data were generated from distributions that were both skewed and kurtotic. CONCLUSIONS: In settings where the goal is to evaluate the overall effects, the LMM excluding mediating variables appears to have good performance with respect to power, bias and coverage probability relative to the SEM. The major benefit of SEMs is that it simultaneously and efficiently models both the direct and indirect effects of the mediation process.
format Text
id pubmed-2842282
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2010
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-28422822010-03-20 Performance of mixed effects models in the analysis of mediated longitudinal data Blood, Emily A Cabral, Howard Heeren, Timothy Cheng, Debbie M BMC Med Res Methodol Research Article BACKGROUND: Linear mixed effects models (LMMs) are a common approach for analyzing longitudinal data in a variety of settings. Although LMMs may be applied to complex data structures, such as settings where mediators are present, it is unclear whether they perform well relative to methods for mediational analyses such as structural equation models (SEMs), which have obvious appeal in such settings. For some researchers, SEMs may be more difficult than LMMs to implement, e.g. due to lack of training in the methodology or the need for specialized SEM software. It therefore is of interest to evaluate whether the LMM performs sufficiently in a scenario particularly suitable for SEMs. We focus on evaluation of the total effect (i.e. direct and indirect) of an exposure on an outcome of interest when a mediating factor is present. Our aim is to explore whether the LMM performs as well as the SEM in a setting that is conducive to using the SEM. METHODS: We simulated mediated longitudinal data from an SEM where a binary, main independent variable has both direct and indirect effects on a continuous outcome. We conducted analyses with both the LMM and SEM to evaluate the performance of the LMM in a setting where the SEM is expected to be preferable. Models were evaluated with respect to bias, coverage probability and power. Sample size, effect size and error distribution of the simulated data were varied. RESULTS: Both models performed well in a range of settings. Marginal increases in power estimates were observed for the SEM, although generally there were no major differences in performance. Power for both models was good with a sample of size of 250 and a small to medium effect size. Bias did not substantially increase for either model when data were generated from distributions that were both skewed and kurtotic. CONCLUSIONS: In settings where the goal is to evaluate the overall effects, the LMM excluding mediating variables appears to have good performance with respect to power, bias and coverage probability relative to the SEM. The major benefit of SEMs is that it simultaneously and efficiently models both the direct and indirect effects of the mediation process. BioMed Central 2010-02-19 /pmc/articles/PMC2842282/ /pubmed/20170503 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-10-16 Text en Copyright ©2010 Blood et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Blood, Emily A
Cabral, Howard
Heeren, Timothy
Cheng, Debbie M
Performance of mixed effects models in the analysis of mediated longitudinal data
title Performance of mixed effects models in the analysis of mediated longitudinal data
title_full Performance of mixed effects models in the analysis of mediated longitudinal data
title_fullStr Performance of mixed effects models in the analysis of mediated longitudinal data
title_full_unstemmed Performance of mixed effects models in the analysis of mediated longitudinal data
title_short Performance of mixed effects models in the analysis of mediated longitudinal data
title_sort performance of mixed effects models in the analysis of mediated longitudinal data
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2842282/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20170503
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-10-16
work_keys_str_mv AT bloodemilya performanceofmixedeffectsmodelsintheanalysisofmediatedlongitudinaldata
AT cabralhoward performanceofmixedeffectsmodelsintheanalysisofmediatedlongitudinaldata
AT heerentimothy performanceofmixedeffectsmodelsintheanalysisofmediatedlongitudinaldata
AT chengdebbiem performanceofmixedeffectsmodelsintheanalysisofmediatedlongitudinaldata