Cited by 233Statistical Methods in Clinical TrialsStatistical Methods and Bayesian InferenceMeta-analysis and systematic reviews

Last observation carried forward versus mixed models in the analysis of psychiatric clinical trials.

Hamer, Robert M., Simpson, Pippa M.·2009·American Journal of Psychiatry

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1176/appi.ajp.2009.09040458

Cites

6 of 6 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
Hamer, R. M., & Simpson, P. M.
Venue
American Journal of Psychiatry
Published
2009-06
Volume
166
Issue
6
Pages
639-641
ISSN
  • 0002-953X (ISSN-L)
  • 1535-7228
OpenAlex
W2153647448
Cited by
233
References
6
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 21 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 17 · 2014: 15 · 2013: 22 · 2012: 17
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • American Journal of Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
Keywords
last observation carried forward, mixed models, missing data, psychiatric clinical trials, longitudinal analysis, imputation methods
MeSH terms
Mental Disorders, Humans, Mathematical Computing, Patient Dropouts, Statistics as Topic, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic

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