Display options
Cite
Depaoli S, van de Schoot R, van Loey N, et al. Using Bayesian statistics for modeling PTSD through Latent Growth Mixture Modeling: implementation and discussion. Eur J Psychotraumatol. 2015;6:27516doi: 10.3402/ejpt.v6.27516.
Depaoli, S., van de Schoot, R., van Loey, N., & Sijbrandij, M. (2015). Using Bayesian statistics for modeling PTSD through Latent Growth Mixture Modeling: implementation and discussion. European journal of psychotraumatology, 627516. https://doi.org/10.3402/ejpt.v6.27516
Depaoli, Sarah, et al. "Using Bayesian statistics for modeling PTSD through Latent Growth Mixture Modeling: implementation and discussion." European journal of psychotraumatology vol. 6 (2015): 27516. doi: https://doi.org/10.3402/ejpt.v6.27516
Depaoli S, van de Schoot R, van Loey N, Sijbrandij M. Using Bayesian statistics for modeling PTSD through Latent Growth Mixture Modeling: implementation and discussion. Eur J Psychotraumatol. 2015 Mar 02;6:27516. doi: 10.3402/ejpt.v6.27516. eCollection 2015. PMID: 25735415; PMCID: PMC4348411.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Eur J Psychotraumatol. 2015 Mar 02;6:27516. doi: 10.3402/ejpt.v6.27516. eCollection 2015.

Using Bayesian statistics for modeling PTSD through Latent Growth Mixture Modeling: implementation and discussion.

European journal of psychotraumatology

Sarah Depaoli, Rens van de Schoot, Nancy van Loey, Marit Sijbrandij

Affiliations

  1. Psychological Sciences, University of California, Merced, CA, USA; [email protected].
  2. Department of Methods and Statistics, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
  3. Optentia Research Program, Faculty of Humanities, North-West University, Mahikeng, South Africa.
  4. Department of Clinical and Health Psychology, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
  5. Department of Behavioral Research, Association of Dutch Burns Centres, AJ Beverwijk, The Netherlands.
  6. Clinical Psychology, VU University, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
  7. EMGO Institute for Health and Care Research, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

PMID: 25735415 PMCID: PMC4348411 DOI: 10.3402/ejpt.v6.27516

Abstract

BACKGROUND: After traumatic events, such as disaster, war trauma, and injuries including burns (which is the focus here), the risk to develop posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is approximately 10% (Breslau & Davis, 1992). Latent Growth Mixture Modeling can be used to classify individuals into distinct groups exhibiting different patterns of PTSD (Galatzer-Levy, 2015). Currently, empirical evidence points to four distinct trajectories of PTSD patterns in those who have experienced burn trauma. These trajectories are labeled as: resilient, recovery, chronic, and delayed onset trajectories (e.g., Bonanno, 2004; Bonanno, Brewin, Kaniasty, & Greca, 2010; Maercker, Gäbler, O'Neil, Schützwohl, & Müller, 2013; Pietrzak et al., 2013). The delayed onset trajectory affects only a small group of individuals, that is, about 4-5% (O'Donnell, Elliott, Lau, & Creamer, 2007). In addition to its low frequency, the later onset of this trajectory may contribute to the fact that these individuals can be easily overlooked by professionals. In this special symposium on Estimating PTSD trajectories (Van de Schoot, 2015a), we illustrate how to properly identify this small group of individuals through the Bayesian estimation framework using previous knowledge through priors (see, e.g., Depaoli & Boyajian, 2014; Van de Schoot, Broere, Perryck, Zondervan-Zwijnenburg, & Van Loey, 2015).

METHOD: We used latent growth mixture modeling (LGMM) (Van de Schoot, 2015b) to estimate PTSD trajectories across 4 years that followed a traumatic burn. We demonstrate and compare results from traditional (maximum likelihood) and Bayesian estimation using priors (see, Depaoli, 2012, 2013). Further, we discuss where priors come from and how to define them in the estimation process.

RESULTS: We demonstrate that only the Bayesian approach results in the desired theory-driven solution of PTSD trajectories. Since the priors are chosen subjectively, we also present a sensitivity analysis of the Bayesian results to illustrate how to check the impact of the prior knowledge integrated into the model.

CONCLUSIONS: We conclude with recommendations and guidelines for researchers looking to implement theory-driven LGMM, and we tailor this discussion to the context of PTSD research.

Keywords: Bayesian estimation; Latent Growth Mixture Modeling; PTSD; delayed onset; sensitivity analysis

References

  1. Psychol Med. 2014 Jan;44(1):205-19 - PubMed
  2. Torture. 2013;23(1):15-27 - PubMed
  3. Eur J Psychotraumatol. 2015 Mar 11;6:25216 - PubMed
  4. Psychol Sci Public Interest. 2010 Jan;11(1):1-49 - PubMed
  5. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2014 Oct;82(5):784-802 - PubMed
  6. Behav Res Ther. 2007 Mar;45(3):601-6 - PubMed
  7. Am J Psychiatry. 1992 May;149(5):671-5 - PubMed
  8. Psychol Methods. 2013 Jun;18(2):186-219 - PubMed
  9. Am Psychol. 2004 Jan;59(1):20-8 - PubMed
  10. Eur J Psychotraumatol. 2015 Mar 02;6:27515 - PubMed
  11. Eur J Psychotraumatol. 2015 Mar 02;6:27514 - PubMed
  12. Eur J Psychotraumatol. 2015 Mar 02;6:27503 - PubMed

Publication Types