TY - JOUR
T1 - Predicting response to intensive multimodal inpatient treatment
T2 - A comparison of single-and multiple-class growth modeling approaches
AU - Smith, Justin D.
AU - Van Ryzin, Mark J.
AU - Fowler, J. Christopher
AU - Handler, Leonard
N1 - Funding Information:
Justin Smith and Mark Van Ryzin received support from National Institute of Mental Health research training grant T32 MH20012, awarded to Elizabeth Stormshak.
PY - 2014/5/4
Y1 - 2014/5/4
N2 - In a modest body of research, personality functioning assessed via performance-based instruments has been found to validly predict treatment outcome and, to some extent, differential response to treatment. However, state-of-the-science longitudinal and mixture modeling techniques, which are common in many areas of clinical psychology, have rarely been used. In this article, we compare multilevel growth curve modeling (MLM) and latent class growth modeling (LCGM) approaches with the same data set to illustrate the different research questions that can be addressed by each method. Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) scores collected at 6 points during the course of a long-term multimodal inpatient treatment of 58 severely and persistently mentally ill adults were used to model the trajectory of treatment outcome. Pretreatment Rorschach-based markers of personality functioning and other markers of psychiatric severity were examined as covariates in each modeling approach. The results of both modeling approaches generally indicated that more psychologically impaired clients responded less favorably to treatment. The LCGM approach revealed 2 unique trajectories of improvement (a persistently low group and a higher starting, improving group). Personality functioning and baseline psychiatric variables significantly predicted group membership and the rate of change within the groups. A side-by-side examination of these 2 methods was found to be useful in predicting differential treatment response with personality functioning variables.
AB - In a modest body of research, personality functioning assessed via performance-based instruments has been found to validly predict treatment outcome and, to some extent, differential response to treatment. However, state-of-the-science longitudinal and mixture modeling techniques, which are common in many areas of clinical psychology, have rarely been used. In this article, we compare multilevel growth curve modeling (MLM) and latent class growth modeling (LCGM) approaches with the same data set to illustrate the different research questions that can be addressed by each method. Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) scores collected at 6 points during the course of a long-term multimodal inpatient treatment of 58 severely and persistently mentally ill adults were used to model the trajectory of treatment outcome. Pretreatment Rorschach-based markers of personality functioning and other markers of psychiatric severity were examined as covariates in each modeling approach. The results of both modeling approaches generally indicated that more psychologically impaired clients responded less favorably to treatment. The LCGM approach revealed 2 unique trajectories of improvement (a persistently low group and a higher starting, improving group). Personality functioning and baseline psychiatric variables significantly predicted group membership and the rate of change within the groups. A side-by-side examination of these 2 methods was found to be useful in predicting differential treatment response with personality functioning variables.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84897977996&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84897977996&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1080/00223891.2013.834439
DO - 10.1080/00223891.2013.834439
M3 - Article
C2 - 24066712
AN - SCOPUS:84897977996
SN - 0022-3891
VL - 96
SP - 306
EP - 315
JO - Journal of Personality Assessment
JF - Journal of Personality Assessment
IS - 3
ER -