Cited by 99Advanced Causal Inference TechniquesStatistical Methods and Bayesian InferencePsychometric Methodologies and Testing

Tutorial: The practical application of longitudinal structural equation mediation models in clinical trials

Open access
Goldsmith, Kimberley A., MacKinnon, David P., Chalder, Trudie, White, Peter D., Sharpe, Michael, Pickles, Andrew·2018·Psychological Methods

Abstract

The study of mediation of treatment effects, or how treatments work, is important to understanding and improving psychological and behavioral treatments, but applications often focus on mediators and outcomes measured at a single time point. Such cross-sectional analyses do not respect the implied temporal ordering that mediation suggests. Clinical trials of treatments often provide repeated measures of outcomes and, increasingly, of mediators as well. Repeated measurements allow the application of various types of longitudinal structural equation mediation models. These provide flexibility in modeling, including the ability to incorporate some types of measurement error and unmeasured confounding that can strengthen the robustness of findings. The usual approach is to identify the most theoretically plausible model and apply that model. In the absence of clear theory, we put forward the option of fitting a few theoretically plausible models, providing a type of sensitivity analysis for the mediation hypothesis. In this tutorial, we outline how to fit several longitudinal mediation models, including simplex, latent growth and latent change models. This will allow readers to learn about one type of model that is of interest, or about several alternative models, so that they can take this sensitivity approach. We use the Pacing, Graded Activity, and Cognitive Behavioral Therapy: A Randomized Evaluation (PACE) trial of rehabilitative treatments for chronic fatigue syndrome (ISRCTN 54285094) as a motivating example and describe how to fit and interpret various longitudinal mediation models using simulated data similar to those in the PACE trial. The simulated data set and Mplus code and output are provided. (PsycINFO Database Record

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/met0000154

Cites

89 of 89 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • An advantage of models that capture longitudinal change on two or more variables simultaneously across a smaller number of time points is that they can be applied in contexts where intensive longitudinal data collection is not practical, while still offering insight into timing and direction of process-outcome relationships.

    “In addition to requiring fewer time points, an advantage of these latter models is that they can be applied in contexts in which it is not practical to adopt intensive longitudinal data collection, while still offering insight into the timing and direction of process-outcome relationships.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Kline RB 2011 Principles and practice of structural equation modelling New York, NY The Guildford Press
  2. Wright S 1920a Correlation and causation Part 1. Method of path coefficients Journal of Agricultural Research 20 0557 0585

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Goldsmith, K. A., MacKinnon, D. P., Chalder, T., White, P. D., Sharpe, M., & Pickles, A.
Affiliations
  • King's College London (GB)
  • Arizona State University (US)
  • Queen Mary University of London (GB)
  • University of Oxford (GB)
Venue
Psychological Methods
Published
2018-06
Volume
23
Issue
2
Pages
191-207
ISSN
  • 1082-989X (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1463
OpenAlex
W2613335938
Cited by
99
References
88
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 1
FWCI
2.28
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Psychological Methods (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • Medical Research Council
  • Department for Health for England
  • The Scottish Chief Scientist Office
  • Department for Work and Pensions
  • National Institute for Health Research (DRF-2011-04-061)
  • King’s College London
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (DA09757)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Advanced Causal Inference Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
Keywords
mediation analysis, clinical trials, repeated measures, latent growth curve models, latent change score models, sensitivity analysis, measurement error, unmeasured confounding, chronic fatigue syndrome, PACE trial
MeSH terms
Clinical Trials as Topic, Humans, Research Design, Models, Statistical, Fatigue Syndrome, Chronic, Outcome Assessment, Health Care

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