Cited by 21Statistical Methods and Bayesian InferenceStatistical Methods in Clinical TrialsAdvanced Causal Inference Techniques

Interindividual differences in treatment effects based on structural equation models with latent variables: an EffectLiteR tutorial

Open access
Mayer, Axel, Zimmermann, Johannes, Hoyer, Jürgen, Salzer, Simone, Wiltink, Jörg, Leibing, Eric, Leichsenring, Falk·2020·Structural Equation Modeling A Multidisciplinary Journal

Abstract

The investigation of interindividual differences in the effects of a treatment is challenging, because many constructs-of-interest in psychological research such as depression or anxiety are latent variables and modeling heterogeneity in treatment effects requires interactions and potentially non-linear relationships. In this paper, we present a tutorial of the EffectLiteR approach that allows for estimating individual treatment effects based on latent variable models. We describe step by step how to apply the approach using the EffectLiteR software package with data from the multicenter randomized controlled trial of the Social Phobia Psychotherapy Network (SOPHO-NET) and provide guidelines and recommendations for researchers. The focus of the paper is on explaining the results of a comprehensive effect analysis in an accessible language and on highlighting the opportunities the EffectLiteR approach offers for analyzing interindividual differences in treatment effects.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/10705511.2019.1671196

Cites

76 of 76 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mayer, A., Zimmermann, J., Hoyer, J., Salzer, S., Wiltink, J., Leibing, E., & Leichsenring, F.
Affiliations
  • RWTH Aachen University (DE)
  • University of Kassel (DE)
  • Technische Universität Dresden (DE)
  • International Psychoanalytic University Berlin (DE)
  • Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz (DE)
  • University of Göttingen (DE)
  • Justus-Liebig-Universität Gießen (DE)
Corresponding author
Mayer, Axel
Venue
Structural Equation Modeling A Multidisciplinary Journal
Published
2019-10-30
Volume
27
Issue
5
Pages
798-816
ISSN
  • 1070-5511 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-8007
OpenAlex
W2982429280
Cited by
21
References
76
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 1
FWCI
1.96
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Structural Equation Modeling A Multidisciplinary Journal (publishedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Publikationen an der Universität Bielefeld (Universität Bielefeld) (submittedVersion)
  • RWTH Publications (RWTH Aachen) (submittedVersion)
  • Figshare (cc-by)
Funders
  • Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (01GV0607)
  • Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (MA 7702/1-1)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Advanced Causal Inference Techniques
Keywords
individual treatment effects, latent variable models, treatment effect heterogeneity, social anxiety disorder, psychotherapy, effect analysis

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