Longitudinal Data Analysis
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Primary analyses compared treatment differences over time in the intent-to-treat sample using mixed-effects regression models.
“The primary analyses compared treatment differences over time in the intent-to-treat sample for ABBT and NDST using mixed-effects regression models (MRM) in SPSS Version 23.0 (Hedeker & Gibbons, 2006).”
From Efficacy of an acceptance-based group behavioral therapy for generalized anxiety disorder. (2020) · cites this paper as Hedeker & Gibbons, 2006
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
Cited by 821
- Authors
- Donald, H., & Robert D., G.
- Venue
- Wiley Series in Probability and Statistics
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2006-03-31
- ISSN
- 1940-6347 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2500897968
- Cited by
- 821
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 3 · 2024: 56 · 2023: 35 · 2022: 50 · 2021: 44 · 2020: 57 · 2019: 49 · 2018: 61 · 2017: 38 · 2016: 48 · 2015: 46 · 2014: 78 · 2013: 41 · 2012: 49
- FWCI
- 5.01
- Type
- book
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Wiley series in probability and statistics (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Spatial and Panel Data Analysis
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Applications
- Keywords
- longitudinal analysis, repeated measures, panel data, time series
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
