IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pntd00/0009042.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Latent Class Analysis: Insights about design and analysis of schistosomiasis diagnostic studies

Author

Listed:
  • Artemis Koukounari
  • Haziq Jamil
  • Elena Erosheva
  • Clive Shiff
  • Irini Moustaki

Abstract

Various global health initiatives are currently advocating the elimination of schistosomiasis within the next decade. Schistosomiasis is a highly debilitating tropical infectious disease with severe burden of morbidity and thus operational research accurately evaluating diagnostics that quantify the epidemic status for guiding effective strategies is essential. Latent class models (LCMs) have been generally considered in epidemiology and in particular in recent schistosomiasis diagnostic studies as a flexible tool for evaluating diagnostics because assessing the true infection status (via a gold standard) is not possible. However, within the biostatistics literature, classical LCM have already been criticised for real-life problems under violation of the conditional independence (CI) assumption and when applied to a small number of diagnostics (i.e. most often 3-5 diagnostic tests). Solutions of relaxing the CI assumption and accounting for zero-inflation, as well as collecting partial gold standard information, have been proposed, offering the potential for more robust model estimates. In the current article, we examined such approaches in the context of schistosomiasis via analysis of two real datasets and extensive simulation studies. Our main conclusions highlighted poor model fit in low prevalence settings and the necessity of collecting partial gold standard information in such settings in order to improve the accuracy and reduce bias of sensitivity and specificity estimates.Author summary: Accurate schistosomiasis diagnosis is essential to assess the impact of large scale and repeated mass drug administration to control or even eliminate this disease. However, in schistosomiasis diagnostic studies, several inherent study design issues pose a real challenge for the currently available statistical tools used for diagnostic modelling and associated data analysis and conclusions. More specifically, those study design issues are: 1) the inclusion of small number of diagnostic tests (i.e. most often five), 2) non formal consensus about a schistosomiasis gold standard, 3) the contemporary use of relatively small sample sizes in relevant studies due to lack of research funding, 4) the differing levels of prevalence of the studied disease even within the same area of one endemic country and 5) other real world factors such as: the lack of appropriate equipment, the variability of certain methods due to biological phenomena and training of technicians across the endemic countries because of scarce financial resources contributing to the existing lack of a schistosomiasis gold standard. The current study aims to caution practitioners from blindly applying statistical models with small number of diagnostic tests and sample sizes, proposing design guidelines of future schistosomiasis diagnostic accuracy studies with recommendations for further research. While our study is centred around the diagnosis of schistosomiasis, we feel that the recommendations can be adapted to other major tropical infectious diseases as well.

Suggested Citation

  • Artemis Koukounari & Haziq Jamil & Elena Erosheva & Clive Shiff & Irini Moustaki, 2021. "Latent Class Analysis: Insights about design and analysis of schistosomiasis diagnostic studies," PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(2), pages 1-23, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pntd00:0009042
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0009042
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosntds/article?id=10.1371/journal.pntd.0009042
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosntds/article?id=10.1371/journal.pntd.0009042&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pntd.0009042?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paul S. Albert & Lori E. Dodd, 2004. "A Cautionary Note on the Robustness of Latent Class Models for Estimating Diagnostic Error without a Gold Standard," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 60(2), pages 427-435, June.
    2. Nandini Dendukuri & Elham Rahme & Patrick Bélisle & Lawrence Joseph, 2004. "Bayesian Sample Size Determination for Prevalence and Diagnostic Test Studies in the Absence of a Gold Standard Test," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 60(2), pages 388-397, June.
    3. Agresti, Alan & Yang, Ming-Chung, 1987. "An empirical investigation of some effects of sparseness in contingency tables," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 9-21.
    4. Paul S. Albert & Lisa M. McShane & Joanna H. Shih, 2001. "Latent Class Modeling Approaches for Assessing Diagnostic Error without a Gold Standard: With Applications to p53 Immunohistochemical Assays in Bladder Tumors," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 57(2), pages 610-619, June.
    5. Bruce D. Spencer, 2012. "When Do Latent Class Models Overstate Accuracy for Diagnostic and Other Classifiers in the Absence of a Gold Standard?," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 68(2), pages 559-566, June.
    6. Albert, Paul S. & Dodd, Lori E., 2008. "On Estimating Diagnostic Accuracy From Studies With Multiple Raters and Partial Gold Standard Evaluation," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 103, pages 61-73, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Chinyereugo M Umemneku Chikere & Kevin Wilson & Sara Graziadio & Luke Vale & A Joy Allen, 2019. "Diagnostic test evaluation methodology: A systematic review of methods employed to evaluate diagnostic tests in the absence of gold standard – An update," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(10), pages 1-25, October.
    2. Liu, Wei & Zhang, Bo & Zhang, Zhiwei & Chen, Baojiang & Zhou, Xiao-Hua, 2015. "A pseudo-likelihood approach for estimating diagnostic accuracy of multiple binary medical tests," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 85-98.
    3. Clara Drew & Moses Badio & Dehkontee Dennis & Lisa Hensley & Elizabeth Higgs & Michael Sneller & Mosoka Fallah & Cavan Reilly, 2023. "Simplifying the estimation of diagnostic testing accuracy over time for high specificity tests in the absence of a gold standard," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 79(2), pages 1546-1558, June.
    4. Bruce D. Spencer, 2012. "When Do Latent Class Models Overstate Accuracy for Diagnostic and Other Classifiers in the Absence of a Gold Standard?," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 68(2), pages 559-566, June.
    5. Bo Zhang & Zhen Chen & Paul S. Albert, 2012. "Estimating Diagnostic Accuracy of Raters Without a Gold Standard by Exploiting a Group of Experts," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 68(4), pages 1294-1302, December.
    6. Elizabeth R. Brown, 2010. "Bayesian Estimation of the Time-Varying Sensitivity of a Diagnostic Test with Application to Mother-to-Child Transmission of HIV," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 66(4), pages 1266-1274, December.
    7. Paul S. Albert, 2007. "Random Effects Modeling Approaches for Estimating ROC Curves from Repeated Ordinal Tests without a Gold Standard," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 63(2), pages 593-602, June.
    8. Geoffrey Jones & Wesley O. Johnson & Timothy E. Hanson & Ronald Christensen, 2010. "Identifiability of Models for Multiple Diagnostic Testing in the Absence of a Gold Standard," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 66(3), pages 855-863, September.
    9. Pankaj Patel & Sherry Thatcher & Katerina Bezrukova, 2013. "Organizationally-relevant configurations: the value of modeling local dependence," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 47(1), pages 287-311, January.
    10. Donal O'Neill & Olive Sweetman, 2013. "Estimating Obesity Rates in Europe in the Presence of Self-Reporting Errors," Economics Department Working Paper Series n236-13.pdf, Department of Economics, National University of Ireland - Maynooth.
    11. Subtil, Ana & de Oliveira, M. Rosário & Gonçalves, Luzia, 2012. "Conditional dependence diagnostic in the latent class model: A simulation study," Statistics & Probability Letters, Elsevier, vol. 82(7), pages 1407-1412.
    12. David R Blair & Kanix Wang & Svetlozar Nestorov & James A Evans & Andrey Rzhetsky, 2014. "Quantifying the Impact and Extent of Undocumented Biomedical Synonymy," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(9), pages 1-17, September.
    13. Stamey, James D. & Boese, Doyle H. & Young, Dean M., 2008. "Confidence intervals for parameters of two diagnostic tests in the absence of a gold standard," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 52(3), pages 1335-1346, January.
    14. O’Neill, Donal, 2015. "Measuring obesity in the absence of a gold standard," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 17(C), pages 116-128.
    15. Galina Williams, 2015. "Households Willingness to Pay for the Emissions Reduction Policy, Queensland, Australia," SAGE Open, , vol. 5(3), pages 21582440156, September.
    16. Riccardo Borgoni & Peter Smith & Ann Berrington, 2009. "Handling the effect of non-response in graphical models for longitudinal data," Statistical Methods & Applications, Springer;Società Italiana di Statistica, vol. 18(1), pages 109-123, March.
    17. Luzia Gonçalves & M. Rosário de Oliveira & Cláudia Pascoal & Ana Pires, 2012. "Sample size for estimating a binomial proportion: comparison of different methods," Journal of Applied Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(11), pages 2453-2473, July.
    18. Paul Gustafson, 2007. "Measurement error modelling with an approximate instrumental variable," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 69(5), pages 797-815, November.
    19. Peijie Hou & Joshua M. Tebbs & Christopher R. Bilder & Christopher S. McMahan, 2017. "Hierarchical group testing for multiple infections," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 73(2), pages 656-665, June.
    20. Mark Reiser & Silvia Cagnone & Junfei Zhu, 2023. "An Extended GFfit Statistic Defined on Orthogonal Components of Pearson’s Chi-Square," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 88(1), pages 208-240, March.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pntd00:0009042. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosntds (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosntds/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.