How can we learn about developmental processes from cross-sectional studies, or can we?

OBJECTIVE Cross-sectional studies are often used in psychiatric research as a basis of longitudinal inferences about developmental or disease processes. While the limitations of such usage are often acknowledged, these are often understated. The authors describe how such inferences are often, and sometimes seriously, misleading. METHOD Why and how these inferences mislead are here demonstrated on an intuitive level, by using simulated data inspired by real problems in psychiatric research. RESULTS Four factors with major roles in the relationship between cross-sectional studies and longitudinal inferences are selection of time scale, type of developmental process studied, reliability of measurement, and clarity of terminology. The authors suggest how to recognize inferential errors when they occur, describe how to protect against such errors in future research, and delineate the circumstances in which only longitudinal studies can answer crucial questions. CONCLUSIONS The simple conclusion is that one must always use the results of cross-sectional studies to draw inferences about longitudinal processes with trepidation.

[1]  W. S. Robinson Ecological correlations and the behavior of individuals. , 1950, International journal of epidemiology.

[2]  L. A. Goodman Ecological Regressions and Behavior of Individuals , 1953 .

[3]  E. Rogot,et al.  A Note on Measurement Errors and Detecting Real Differences , 1961 .

[4]  Jacob Cohen Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences , 1969, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[5]  C. Blyth On Simpson's Paradox and the Sure-Thing Principle , 1972 .

[6]  D. Hand Psychiatric Examples of Simpson's Paradox , 1979, British Journal of Psychiatry.

[7]  H. Kraemer Ramifications of a population model forκ as a coefficient of reliability , 1979 .

[8]  J. P. Sutcliffe,et al.  On the relationship of reliability to statistical power. , 1980 .

[9]  Clifford H. Wagner Simpson's Paradox in Real Life , 1982 .

[10]  H. Weill,et al.  Noncomparability of longitudinally and cross-sectionally determined annual change in spirometry. , 2015, American Review of Respiratory Disease.

[11]  W. Alan Nicewander,et al.  Reliability of measurement and the power of statistical tests: Some new results. , 1983 .

[12]  T. Strien On longitudinal versus cross-sectional studies of obesity: possible artefacts. , 1985 .

[13]  J. Robins,et al.  Explaining discrepancies between longitudinal and cross-sectional models. , 1986, Journal of chronic diseases.

[14]  Martijn P. F. Berger,et al.  A Comparison of Efficiencies of Longitudinal, Mixed Longitudinal, and Cross-Sectional Designs , 1986 .

[15]  Helena Chmura Kraemer,et al.  How Many Subjects? Statistical Power Analysis in Research , 1987 .

[16]  A. Buist,et al.  Longitudinal versus cross-sectional estimation of lung function decline--further insights. , 1988, Statistics in medicine.

[17]  H. Kraemer,et al.  Measurement of reliability for categorical data in medical research , 1992, Statistical methods in medical research.

[18]  W. Vollmer Reconciling cross-sectional with longitudinal observations on annual decline. , 1993, Occupational medicine.

[19]  H. Kraemer,et al.  Can state and trait variables be disentangled? A methodological framework for psychiatric disorders , 1994, Psychiatry Research.

[20]  H. Kraemer,et al.  The Stages of Alzheimer’s Disease: A Reappraisal , 1998, Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders.