Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This study used Monte Carlo simulations to evaluate the performance of alternative models for the analysis of group-randomized trials having more than two time intervals for data collection. The major distinction among the models tested was the sampling variance of the intervention effect. In the mixed-model ANOVA, the sampling variance of the intervention effect is based on the variance among group x time-interval means. In the random coefficients model, the sampling variance of the intervention effect is based on the variance among the group-specific slopes. These models are equivalent when the design includes only two time intervals, but not when there are more than two time intervals. The results indicate that the mixed-model ANOVA yields unbiased estimates of sampling variation and nominal type I error rates when the group-specific time trends are homogenous. However, when the group-specific time trends are heterogeneous, the mixed-model ANOVA yields downwardly biased estimates of sampling variance and inflated type I error rates. In contrast, the random coefficients model yields unbiased estimates of sampling variance and the nominal type I error rate regardless of the pattern among the groups. We discuss implications for the analysis of group-randomized trials with more than two time intervals.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Murray et al. (1998) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: