Latent Class Models in Diagnostic Studies When There is No Reference Standard-A Systematic Review

被引:170
作者
van Smeden, Maarten [1 ]
Naaktgeboren, Christiana A. [1 ]
Reitsma, Johannes B. [1 ]
Moons, Karel G. M. [1 ]
de Groot, Joris A. H. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Med Ctr Utrecht, Julius Ctr Hlth Sci & Primary Care, NL-3584 CG Utrecht, Netherlands
关键词
diagnostic tests; routine; models; statistical; prevalence; reference standards; review; sensitivity and specificity; DISEASE PREVALENCE; CONDITIONAL DEPENDENCE; EVALUATING ACCURACY; LOCAL DEPENDENCE; TEST SENSITIVITY; GOLD STANDARD; TESTS; ABSENCE; ERROR; SPECIFICITY;
D O I
10.1093/aje/kwt286
中图分类号
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号
1004 ; 120402 ;
摘要
Latent class models (LCMs) combine the results of multiple diagnostic tests through a statistical model to obtain estimates of disease prevalence and diagnostic test accuracy in situations where there is no single, accurate reference standard. We performed a systematic review of the methodology and reporting of LCMs in diagnostic accuracy studies. This review shows that the use of LCMs in such studies increased sharply in the past decade, notably in the domain of infectious diseases (overall contribution: 59). The 64 reviewed studies used a range of differently specified parametric latent variable models, applying Bayesian and frequentist methods. The critical assumption underlying the majority of LCM applications (61) is that the test observations must be independent within 2 classes. Because violations of this assumption can lead to biased estimates of accuracy and prevalence, performing and reporting checks of whether assumptions are met is essential. Unfortunately, our review shows that 28 of the included studies failed to report any information that enables verification of model assumptions or performance. Because of the lack of information on model fit and adequate evidence external to the LCMs, it is often difficult for readers to judge the validity of LCM-based inferences and conclusions reached.
引用
收藏
页码:423 / 431
页数:9
相关论文
共 46 条
[1]  
Agresti A, 1992, Stat Methods Med Res, V1, P201, DOI 10.1177/096228029200100205
[2]   On estimating diagnostic accuracy from studies with multiple raters and partial gold standard evaluation [J].
Albert, Paul S. ;
Dodd, Lori E. .
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN STATISTICAL ASSOCIATION, 2008, 103 (481) :61-73
[3]   A cautionary note on the robustness of latent class models for estimating diagnostic error without a gold standard [J].
Albert, PS ;
Dodd, LE .
BIOMETRICS, 2004, 60 (02) :427-435
[4]  
Alonzo TA, 1999, STAT MED, V18, P2987, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0258(19991130)18:22<2987::AID-SIM205>3.0.CO
[5]  
2-B
[6]  
[Anonymous], 2002, Latent Class Analysis
[7]  
[Anonymous], 2005, Technical guide for Latent Gold 4.0: Basic and Advanced
[8]  
[Anonymous], 2004, Generalized latent variable modeling: Multilevel, longitudinal, and structural equation models
[9]   BIASES IN THE ASSESSMENT OF DIAGNOSTIC-TESTS [J].
BEGG, CB .
STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 1987, 6 (04) :411-423
[10]   Estimating disease prevalence in the absence of a gold standard [J].
Black, MA ;
Craig, BA .
STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2002, 21 (18) :2653-2669