Assessing measurement error in surveys using latent class analysis: application to self-reported illicit drug use in data from the Iranian Mental Health Survey
2
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Latent class analysis (LCA) is a method of assessing and correcting measurement error in surveys. The local independence assumption in LCA assumes that indicators are independent from each other condition on the latent variable. Violation of this assumption leads to unreliable results. We explored this issue by using LCA to estimate the prevalence of illicit drug use in the Iranian Mental Health Survey. The following three indicators were included in the LCA models: five or more instances of using any illicit drug in the past 12 months (indicator A), any use of any illicit drug in the past 12 months (indicator B), and the self-perceived need of treatment services or having received treatment for a substance use disorder in the past 12 months (indicator C). Gender was also used in all LCA models as a grouping variable. One LCA model using indicators A and B, as well as 10 different LCA models using indicators A, B, and C, were fitted to the data. The three models that had the best fit to the data included the following correlations between indicators: (AC and AB), (AC), and (AC, BC, and AB). The estimated prevalence of illicit drug use based on these three models was 28.9%, 6.2% and 42.2%, respectively. None of these models completely controlled for violation of the local independence assumption. In order to perform unbiased estimations using the LCA approach, the factors violating the local independence assumption (behaviorally correlated error, bivocality, and latent heterogeneity) should be completely taken into account in all models using well-known methods.
Abstract
Latent class analysis (LCA) is a method of assessing and correcting measurement error in surveys. The local independence assumption in LCA assumes that indicators are independent from each other condition on the latent variable. Violation of this assumption leads to unreliable results. We explored this issue by using LCA to estimate the prevalence of illicit drug use in the Iranian Mental Health Survey. The following three indicators were included in the LCA models: five or more instances of using any illicit drug in the past 12 months (indicator A), any use of any illicit drug in the past 12 months (indicator B), and the self-perceived need of treatment services or having received treatment for a substance use disorder in the past 12 months (indicator C). Gender was also used in all LCA models as a grouping variable. One LCA model using indicators A and B, as well as 10 different LCA models using indicators A, B, and C, were fitted to the data. The three models that had the best fit to the data included the following correlations between indicators: (AC and AB), (AC), and (AC, BC, and AB). The estimated prevalence of illicit drug use based on these three models was 28.9%, 6.2% and 42.2%, respectively. None of these models completely controlled for violation of the local independence assumption. In order to perform unbiased estimations using the LCA approach, the factors violating the local independence assumption (behaviorally correlated error, bivocality, and latent heterogeneity) should be completely taken into account in all models using well-known methods.
참고문헌 (22)
- "A brief history of classification error models" (2008)[URL]
- Kasprzyk D., "Household sample surveys in developing and transition countries", pp.171~198 (2005), United Nations
- Berzofsky ME, "Local dependence in latent class analysis of rare and sensitive events", Sociol Methods Res, 43, pp.137~170 (2014)
- Biemer PP, "Survey measurement and process quality", pp.601~632 (1997), Wiley
- Gustafson P, "Handbook of epidemiology", pp.639~658 (2014), Springer
- Lazarsfeld PF, "Latent structure analysis" (1968), Houghton Mifflin
- Biemer PP, "Measurement error evaluation of self-reported druguse : a latent class analysis of the US National Household Survey on Drug Abuse", J R Stat Soc Ser A Stat Soc, 165, pp.97~119 (2002)
- "When Do latent class models overstate accuracy for binary classifiers? With applications to jury accuracy, survey response error, and diagnostic error" (2009)[URL]
- Biemer PP, "Latent class analysis of survey error" (2011), Wiley
- Agresti A, "Categorical data analysis", pp.721~ (2002), John Wiley & Sons
- Brenner H, "Use and limitations of dual measurements in correcting for nondifferential exposure misclassification", Epidemiology, 3, pp.216~222 (1992)
- Walter SD, "Estimation of test error rates, disease prevalence and relative risk from misclassified data: a review", J Clin Epidemiol, 41, pp.923~937 (1988)
- "Iranian Mental Health Survey (1389-90)"[URL]
- Farhoudian A, "Component analysis of Iranian crack; a newly abused narcotic substance in Iran", Iran J Pharm Res, 13, pp.337~344 (2014)
- Lin TH, "Model selection information criteria for non-nested latent class models", J Educ Behav Stat, 22, pp.249~264 (1997)
- Dayton CM, "A scaling model with response errors and intrinsically unscalable respondents", Psychometrika, 45, pp.343~356 (1980)
- Goodman LA, "Exploratory latent structure analysis using both identifiable and unidentifiable models", Biometrika, 61, pp.215~231 (1974)
- Vermunt JK, "Log-linear models for event histories" (1997), SAGE
- "R: a language and environment for statistical computing" (2015)[URL]
- "Package ‘gllm’: generalised log-linear model; 2015" (2015)[URL]
- Tourangeau R, "Sensitive questions in surveys", Psychol Bull, 133, pp.859~883 (2007)
- Hui SL, "Estimating the error rates of diagnostic tests", Biometrics, 36, pp.167~171 (1980)