Beyond ANOVA and MANOVA for repeated measures: Advantages of generalized estimated equations and generalized linear mixed models and its use in neuroscience research
Abstract
In neuroscience research, longitudinal data are often analysed using analysis of variance (ANOVA) and multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) for repeated measures (rmANOVA/rmMANOVA). However, these analyses have special requirements: The variances of the differences between all possible pairs of within‐subject conditions (i.e., levels of the independent variable) must be equal. They are also limited to fixed repeated time intervals and are sensitive to missing data. In contrast, other models, such as the generalized estimating equations (GEE) and the generalized linear mixed models (GLMM), suggest another way to think about the data and the studied phenomenon. Instead of forcing the data into the ANOVAs assumptions, it is possible to design a flexible/personalized model according to the nature of the dependent variable. We discuss some advantages of GEE and GLMM as alternatives to rmANOVA and rmMANOVA in neuroscience research, including the possibility of using different distributions for the parameters of the dependent variable, a better approach for different time length points, and better adjustment to missing data. We illustrate these advantages by showing a comparison between rmANOVA and GEE in a real example and providing the data and a tutorial code to reproduce these analyses in R. We conclude that GEE and GLMM may provide more reliable results when compared to rmANOVA and rmMANOVA in neuroscience research, especially in small sample sizes with unbalanced longitudinal designs with or without missing data.
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?
The only FDA-approved treatments for type 1 diabetes are insulin and pramlintide.
“The only Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved treatments for T1D are insulin and pramlintide 25 ; the latter is rarely used due to gastrointestinal (GI) side effects and risk for severe hypoglycemia.”
From Effectiveness of Semaglutide and Tirzepatide in Overweight and Obese Adults with Type 1 Diabetes (2025) · cites this paper as [25]
Cites
Effect size, confidence interval and statistical significance: a practical guide for biologists
Nakagawa, S., & Cuthill, I. C. (2007) · Biological Reviews · doi:10.1111/j.1469-185x.2007.00027.x · Cited by 3,835 · see citing works
Quasi-likelihood functions, generalized linear models, and the gauss-newton method
Wedderburn, R. W. M. (1974) · Biometrika · doi:10.2307/2334725 · Cited by 2,122 · see citing works
Modern robust statistical methods: An easy way to maximize the accuracy and power of your research.
Erceg-Hurn, D. M., & Mirosevich, V. M. (2008) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.63.7.591 · Cited by 959 · see citing works
Detecting and avoiding likely false‐positive findings – a practical guide
Forstmeier, W., Wagenmakers, E., & Parker, T. H. (2017) · Biological Reviews · doi:10.1111/brv.12315 · Cited by 436 · see citing works
Pekár, S., & Brabec, M. (2018) · Ethology · doi:10.1111/eth.12713 · Cited by 178 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Efficacy and Safety of Tirzepatide in Overweight and Obese Adult Patients with Type 1 Diabetes
Garg, S. K., Akturk, H. K., Kaur, G., Beatson, C., & Snell-Bergeon, J. (2024) · Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics · doi:10.1089/dia.2024.0050 · Cited by 65 · see citing works
Effectiveness of Semaglutide and Tirzepatide in Overweight and Obese Adults with Type 1 Diabetes
Snell-Bergeon, J. K., Kaur, G., Renner, D., Akturk, H. K., Beatson, C., & Garg, S. K. (2025) · Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics · doi:10.1089/dia.2024.0328 · Cited by 40 · see citing works
Bernanke, A., Hasley, R., Sabetfakhri, N., de Wit, H., Smith, B. M., Wang, L., Brenner, L. A., Hanlon, C., Philip, N. S., Ajilore, O., et al. (2024) · JMIR Research Protocols · doi:10.2196/58206 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
- Authors
- de Melo, M. B., Daldegan‐Bueno, D., Menezes Oliveira, M. G., & de Souza, A. L.
- Affiliations
- Departamento de Psicobiologia Universidade Federal de São Paulo São Paulo SP Brazil
- Simon Fraser University (CA)
- Venue
- European Journal of Neuroscience
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2022-11-14
- Volume
- 56
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 6089-6098
- ISSN
- 0953-816X (ISSN-L)
- 1460-9568
- OpenAlex
- W4308372578
- Cited by
- 116
- References
- 5
- Citations by year
- 2026: 37 · 2025: 38 · 2024: 33 · 2023: 8
- FWCI
- 14.64
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- European Journal of Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- ResearchSpace (University of Auckland) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Agriculture, Soil, Plant Science
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Applications
- Keywords
- generalized estimating equations, generalized linear mixed models, repeated measures ANOVA, longitudinal analysis, missing data, unbalanced designs, small sample size, within-subject variance, time-varying covariates, neuroscience data analysis
- MeSH terms
- Analysis of Variance, Longitudinal Studies, Neurosciences, Research Design, Models, Statistical, Linear Models
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