↓ Skip to main content

Methods for Synthesizing Findings on Moderation Effects Across Multiple Randomized Trials

Overview of attention for article published in Prevention Science, March 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
76 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
63 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Methods for Synthesizing Findings on Moderation Effects Across Multiple Randomized Trials
Published in
Prevention Science, March 2011
DOI 10.1007/s11121-011-0207-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

C. Hendricks Brown, Zili Sloboda, Fabrizio Faggiano, Brent Teasdale, Ferdinand Keller, Gregor Burkhart, Federica Vigna-Taglianti, George Howe, Katherine Masyn, Wei Wang, Bengt Muthén, Peggy Stephens, Scott Grey, Tatiana Perrino, Prevention Science and Methodology Group

Abstract

This paper presents new methods for synthesizing results from subgroup and moderation analyses across different randomized trials. We demonstrate that such a synthesis generally results in additional power to detect significant moderation findings above what one would find in a single trial. Three general methods for conducting synthesis analyses are discussed, with two methods, integrative data analysis and parallel analyses, sharing a large advantage over traditional methods available in meta-analysis. We present a broad class of analytic models to examine moderation effects across trials that can be used to assess their overall effect and explain sources of heterogeneity, and present ways to disentangle differences across trials due to individual differences, contextual level differences, intervention, and trial design.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 5%
Australia 1 2%
Unknown 59 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 16 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 22%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 14%
Professor 5 8%
Other 4 6%
Other 7 11%
Unknown 8 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 17 27%
Social Sciences 13 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 12 19%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 5%
Mathematics 2 3%
Other 4 6%
Unknown 12 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 January 2016.
All research outputs
#16,736,318
of 25,600,774 outputs
Outputs from Prevention Science
#843
of 1,148 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#94,660
of 120,588 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Prevention Science
#10
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,600,774 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,148 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.6. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 120,588 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.