Using Structural Equation Modeling to Examine the Influence of Social, Behavioral, and Nutritional Variables on Health Outcomes Based on NHANES Data: Addressing Complex Design, Nonnormally Distributed Variables, and Missing Information.

NHANES Structural equation modeling complex survey design multiple imputation quasi-maximum likelihood

Journal

Current developments in nutrition
ISSN: 2475-2991
Titre abrégé: Curr Dev Nutr
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101717957

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
May 2019
Historique:
received: 09 10 2018
revised: 17 01 2019
accepted: 01 02 2019
entrez: 23 4 2019
pubmed: 23 4 2019
medline: 23 4 2019
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Structural equation modeling (SEM) is a multivariate analysis method for exploring relations between latent constructs and measured variables. As a theory-guided approach, SEM estimates directional pathways in complex models based on longitudinal or cross-sectional data where randomized control trials would either be unethical or cost prohibitive. However, this method is infrequently used in nutrition research, despite recommendations by epidemiologists for its increased use. The aim of this study was to explore 3 key methodologic areas for consideration by researchers when conducting SEM with complex survey datasets: the use of sampling weights, treatment of missing data, and model estimation techniques. With the use of data from NHANES waves 2005-2010, we developed an SEM to estimate the relation between the latent construct of depression and measured variables of food security, tobacco use (serum cotinine), and age. We used a hierarchic approach to compare 5 SEM model iterations through the use of: Path coefficients differed between 15.68% and 19.17% among model iterations. Nearly one-third of the cases had missing values, and MI reliably imputed values, allowing all cases to be represented in the final model iterations. QML provided better model fit statistics in all iterations. Nutrition epidemiologists should use complex weights, MI, and QML as a best-practices approach to SEM when conducting analyses with complex design survey data.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Structural equation modeling (SEM) is a multivariate analysis method for exploring relations between latent constructs and measured variables. As a theory-guided approach, SEM estimates directional pathways in complex models based on longitudinal or cross-sectional data where randomized control trials would either be unethical or cost prohibitive. However, this method is infrequently used in nutrition research, despite recommendations by epidemiologists for its increased use.
OBJECTIVES OBJECTIVE
The aim of this study was to explore 3 key methodologic areas for consideration by researchers when conducting SEM with complex survey datasets: the use of sampling weights, treatment of missing data, and model estimation techniques.
METHODS METHODS
With the use of data from NHANES waves 2005-2010, we developed an SEM to estimate the relation between the latent construct of depression and measured variables of food security, tobacco use (serum cotinine), and age. We used a hierarchic approach to compare 5 SEM model iterations through the use of:
RESULTS RESULTS
Path coefficients differed between 15.68% and 19.17% among model iterations. Nearly one-third of the cases had missing values, and MI reliably imputed values, allowing all cases to be represented in the final model iterations. QML provided better model fit statistics in all iterations.
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
Nutrition epidemiologists should use complex weights, MI, and QML as a best-practices approach to SEM when conducting analyses with complex design survey data.

Identifiants

pubmed: 31008441
doi: 10.1093/cdn/nzz010
pii: nzz010
pmc: PMC6465451
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

nzz010

Subventions

Organisme : NIGMS NIH HHS
ID : P20 GM109097
Pays : United States

Références

JAMA. 1999 Nov 10;282(18):1737-44
pubmed: 10568646
J Epidemiol Community Health. 2002 Mar;56(3):167-70
pubmed: 11854334
J Health Soc Behav. 2004 Jun;45(2):171-86
pubmed: 15305758
Eval Health Prof. 2005 Sep;28(3):295-309
pubmed: 16123259
Prev Sci. 2007 Sep;8(3):206-13
pubmed: 17549635
Am J Health Promot. 2008 Jul-Aug;22(6):386-92
pubmed: 18677878
Qual Health Res. 2009 Jul;19(7):1010-24
pubmed: 19556404
J Nutr. 2010 Feb;140(2):304-10
pubmed: 20032485
Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2010 Jun;19(6):618-26
pubmed: 20306452
BMC Res Notes. 2010 Oct 22;3:267
pubmed: 20969789
Soc Sci Med. 2011 May;72(9):1463-71
pubmed: 21481507
Prim Care Companion J Clin Psychiatry. 2010;12(6):null
pubmed: 21494346
Int J Mol Sci. 2015 Aug 05;16(8):18129-48
pubmed: 26251900
JAMA. 2015 Nov 10;314(18):1966-7
pubmed: 26547468
PLoS One. 2018 Feb 23;13(2):e0193356
pubmed: 29474410
Am J Public Health. 1996 Feb;86(2):214-20
pubmed: 8633738

Auteurs

Micah L Hartwell (ML)

School of Community Health Sciences, Counseling and Counseling Psychology, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK.
School of Education Foundations, Leadership and Aviation, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK.
Master of Public Health Program, Center for Health Sciences, Oklahoma State University, Tulsa, OK.

Jam Khojasteh (J)

School of Education Foundations, Leadership and Aviation, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK.

Marianna S Wetherill (MS)

Department of Health Promotion Sciences, Hudson College of Public Health, University of Oklahoma Tulsa Schusterman Center, Tulsa, OK.

Julie M Croff (JM)

Master of Public Health Program, Center for Health Sciences, Oklahoma State University, Tulsa, OK.
Department of Rural Health, Center for Health Sciences, Oklahoma State University, Tulsa, OK.

Denna Wheeler (D)

Master of Public Health Program, Center for Health Sciences, Oklahoma State University, Tulsa, OK.
Department of Rural Health, Center for Health Sciences, Oklahoma State University, Tulsa, OK.

Classifications MeSH