Developments and debates on latent variable modeling in diagnostic studies when there is no gold standard

References

• van Smeden M, Naaktgeboren CA, Reitsma JB, et al. Latent class models in diagnostic studies when there is no reference standard – a systematic review. Am J Epidemiol. 2013;179(4):423–431.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hui SL, Zhou XH. Evaluation of diagnostic tests without gold standards. Stat Methods Med Res. 1998;7(4):354–370.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rabe-Hesketh S, Skrondal A. Classical latent variable models for medical research. Stat Methods Med Res. 2008;17(1):5–32.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rindskopf D, Rindskopf W. The value of latent class analysis in medical diagnosis. Stat Med. 1986;5(1):21–27.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Embretson SE, Reise SP. Item response theory. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.; 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Nunnally JC, Bernstein IH, Berge JM. Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1967.
   Google Scholar
• Formann AK, Kohlmann T. Latent class analysis in medical research. Stat Methods Med Res. 1996;5(2):179–211.
   Google Scholar
• Dempster AP, Laird NM, Rubin DB. Maximum likelihood from incomplete data via the em algorithm. J R Stat Soc Ser B Methodol. 1977;39(1):1–22.
   Google Scholar
• Goodman LA. Exploratory latent structure analysis using both identifiable and unidentifiable models. Biometrika. 1974;61(2):215–231.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hui SL, Walter SD. Estimating the error rates of diagnostic tests. Biometrics. 1980;36:167–171.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Branscum A, Gardner I, Johnson W. Estimation of diagnostic-test sensitivity and specificity through Bayesian modeling. Prev Vet Med. 2005;68(2–4):145–163.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson WO, Gastwirth JL, Pearson LM. Screening without a ‘gold standard’: the Hui–Walter paradigm revisited. Am J Epidemiol. 2001;153(9):921–924.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dawid AP, Skene AM. Maximum likelihood estimation of observer error-rates using the em algorithm. J R Stat Soc Ser C Appl Stat. 1979;28(1):20–28.
   Google Scholar
• Walter S. Measuring the reliability of clinical data: the case for using three observers. Rev Epidemiol Sante Publique. 1984;32(3–4):206–211.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walter SD, Irwig LM. Estimation of test error rates, disease prevalence and relative risk from misclassified data: a review. J Clin Epidemiol. 1988;41(9):923–937.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vacek PM. The effect of conditional dependence on the evaluation of diagnostic tests. Biometrics. 1985;41(4):959–968.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dendukuri N, Joseph L. Bayesian approaches to modeling the conditional dependence between multiple diagnostic tests. Biometrics. 2001;57(1):158–167.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Albert PS, McShane LM, Shih JH, et al. Latent class modeling approaches for assessing diagnostic error without a gold standard: with applications to p53 immunohistochemical assays in bladder tumors. Biometrics. 2001;57(2):610–619.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Qu Y, Hadgu A. A model for evaluating sensitivity and specificity for correlated diagnostic tests in efficacy studies with an imperfect reference test. J Am Stat Assoc. 1998;93(443):920–928.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Qu Y, Tan M, Kutner MH. Random effects models in latent class analysis for evaluating accuracy of diagnostic tests. Biometrics. 1996;52:797–810.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sperling RA, Aisen PS, Beckett LA, et al. Toward defining the preclinical stages of Alzheimer's disease: recommendations from the national institute on aging-Alzheimer's association workgroups on diagnostic guidelines for Alzheimer's disease. Alzheimers Dement. 2011;7(3):280–292.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morris J, Storandt M, McKeel D, et al. Cerebral amyloid deposition and diffuse plaques in ‘normal’ aging: evidence for presymptomatic and very mild Alzheimer's disease. Neurology. 1996;46(3):707–719.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morris JC, Roe CM, Xiong C, et al. Apoe predicts amyloid-beta but not tau Alzheimer pathology in cognitively normal aging. Ann Neurol. 2010;67(1):122–131.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bandeen-Roche K, Miglioretti DL, Zeger SL, et al. Latent variable regression for multiple discrete outcomes. J Am Stat Assoc. 1997;92(440):1375–1386.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Proust-Lima C, Dartigues J-F, Jacqmin-Gadda H. Joint modeling of repeated multivariate cognitive measures and competing risks of dementia and death: a latent process and latent class approach. Stat Med. 2016;35(3):382–398.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang Z, Sebestyen K, Monsell SE. Model-based clustering for assessing the prognostic value of imaging biomarkers and mixed type tests. Comput Stat Data Anal. 2017;113:125–135.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morrison KT, Shaddick G, Henderson SB, et al. A latent process model for forecasting multiple time series in environmental public health surveillance. Stat Med. 2016;35(18):3085–3100.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muthén BO. Latent variable mixture modeling. In New developments and techniques in structural equation modeling, p. 21–54. Psychology Press. 2001.
   Google Scholar
• Proust C, Jacqmin-Gadda H, Taylor JM, et al. A nonlinear model with latent process for cognitive evolution using multivariate longitudinal data. Biometrics. 2006;62(4):1014–1024.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roy J, Lin X. Latent variable models for longitudinal data with multiple continuous outcomes. Biometrics. 2000;56(4):1047–1054.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yu M, Taylor JMG, Sandler HM. Individual prediction in prostate cancer studies using a joint longitudinal survival–cure model. J Am Stat Assoc. 2008;103(481):178–187.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Proust-Lima C, Séne M, Taylor JM, et al. Joint latent class models for longitudinal and time-to-event data: a review. Stat Methods Med Res. 2014;23(1):74–90.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li D, Iddi S, Thompson WK, et al. Bayesian latent time joint mixed effect models for multicohort longitudinal data. Statistical methods in medical research, page 0962280217737566. 2017.
   Google Scholar
• De Meyer G, Shapiro F, Vanderstichele H, et al. Diagnosis-independent Alzheimer disease biomarker signature in cognitively normal elderly people. Arch Neurol. 2010;67(8):949–956.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Leoutsakos J-MS, Forrester SN, Corcoran CD, et al. Latent classes of course in Alzheimer's disease and predictors: the cache county dementia progression study. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2015;30(8):824–832.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang Z, Zhou X-H. Biomarker assessment and combination with differential covariate effects and an unknown gold standard, with an application to Alzheimer's disease. Ann Appl Stat. 2018;12(2):1204–1227.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gonçalves L, Subtil A, de Oliveira MR, et al. Bayesian latent class models in malaria diagnosis. PLoS ONE. 2012;7(7):e40633.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Black CM. Current methods of laboratory diagnosis of Chlamydia trachomatis infections. Clin Microbiol Rev. 1997;10(1):160–184.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hogan C, Denning DW. Allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis and related allergic syndromes. In Seminars in respiratory and critical care medicine, Vol. 32, p. 682–692. © Thieme Medical Publishers. 2011.
   Google Scholar
• Patterson R, Greenberger PA, Halwig JM, et al. Allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis: natural history and classification of early disease by serologic and roentgenographic studies. Arch Intern Med. 1986;146(5):916–918.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Agarwal R. Controversies in allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis. Int J Respir Care. 2010;6(2):53–4.
   Google Scholar
• Agarwal R, Maskey D, Aggarwal AN, et al. Diagnostic performance of various tests and criteria employed in allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis: a latent class analysis. PLoS ONE. 2013;8(4):e61105.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baxter CG, Dunn G, Jones AM, et al. Novel immunologic classification of aspergillosis in adult cystic fibrosis. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2013;132(3):560–566.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bandeen-Roche K, Xue Q-L, Ferrucci L, et al. Phenotype of frailty: characterization in the women's health and aging studies. J Gerontol Ser A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2006;61(3):262–266.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burnett J, Dyer CB, Halphen JM, et al. Four subtypes of self-neglect in older adults: results of a latent class analysis. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2014;62(6):1127–1132.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fossati A, Beauchaine TP, Grazioli F, et al. A latent structure analysis of diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, narcissistic personality disorder criteria. Compr Psychiatry. 2005;46(5):361–367.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dall'Era MA, Albertsen PC, Bangma C, et al. Active surveillance for prostate cancer: a systematic review of the literature. Eur Urol. 2012;62(6):976–983.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gleason DF. Histologic grading of prostate cancer: a perspective. Hum Pathol. 1992;23(3):273–279.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coley RY, Fisher AJ, Mamawala M, et al. A Bayesian hierarchical model for prediction of latent health states from multiple data sources with application to active surveillance of prostate cancer. 2015. arXiv preprint arXiv:1508.07511.
   Google Scholar
• Muthén BO. Beyond sem: general latent variable modeling. Behaviormetrika. 2002;29(1):81–117.
   Google Scholar
• Pepe MS, Janes H. Insights into latent class analysis of diagnostic test performance. Biostatistics. 2006;8(2):474–484.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hardy J, Selkoe DJ. The amyloid hypothesis of Alzheimer's disease: progress and problems on the road to therapeutics. science. 2002;297(5580):353–356.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Edison P, Rowe CC, Rinne JO, et al. Amyloid load in Parkinson's disease dementia and Lewy body dementia measured with [11c] pib positron emission tomography. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2008;79(12):1331–1338.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rumble B, Retallack R, Hilbich C, et al. Amyloid a4 protein and its precursor in Down's syndrome and Alzheimer's disease. New England J Med. 1989;320(22):1446–1452.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ittner LM, Götz J. Amyloid-β and tau – a toxic pas de deux in Alzheimer's disease. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2011;12(2):67.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jack CR, Bennett DA, Blennow K, et al. Nia-aa research framework: toward a biological definition of Alzheimer's disease. Alzheimers Dement. 2018;14(4):535–562.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim S, Tadesse MG, Vannucci M. Variable selection in clustering via Dirichlet process mixture models. Biometrika. 2006;93(4):877–893.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maugis C, Celeux G, Martin-Magniette M-L. Variable selection for clustering with gaussian mixture models. Biometrics. 2009;65(3):701–709.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang S, Zhu J. Variable selection for model-based high-dimensional clustering and its application to microarray data. Biometrics. 2008;64(2):440–448.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Raftery AE, Dean N. Variable selection for model-based clustering. J Am Stat Assoc. 2006;101(473):168–178.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kostić V, Agosta F, Petrović I, et al. Regional patterns of brain tissue loss associated with depression in Parkinson disease. Neurology. 2010;75(10):857–863.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levine B, Kovacevic N, Nica E, et al. The toronto traumatic brain injury study: injury severity and quantified MRI. Neurology. 2008;70(10):771–778.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McKhann G, Drachman D, Folstein M, et al. Clinical diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease: report of the nincds-adrda work group* under the auspices of Department of Health and Human Services task force on Alzheimer's disease. Neurology. 1984;34(7):939–939.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Albert MS, DeKosky ST, Dickson D, et al. The diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment due to Alzheimer's disease: recommendations from the national institute on aging-Alzheimer's association workgroups on diagnostic guidelines for Alzheimer's disease. Alzheimers Dement. 2011;7(3):270–279.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jack Jr CR, Albert MS, Knopman DS, et al. Introduction to the recommendations from the National Institute on Aging–Alzheimer's Association workgroups on diagnostic guidelines for Alzheimer's disease. Alzheimers Dement. 2011;7(3):257–262.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McKhann GM, Knopman DS, Chertkow H, et al. The diagnosis of dementia due to Alzheimer's disease: recommendations from the National Institute on Aging–Alzheimer's Association Workgroups on diagnostic guidelines for Alzheimer's disease. Alzheimers Dement. 2011;7(3):263–269.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Formann AK. Latent class model diagnostics–a review and some proposals. Comput Stat Data Anal. 2003;41(3–4):549–559.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Collins LM, Fidler PL, Wugalter SE, et al. Goodness-of-fit testing for latent class models. Multivariate Behav Res. 1993;28(3):375–389.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rubin DB, Stern HS. Testing in latent class models using a posterior predictive check distribution. Latent Variables Analysis: Applications for Developmental Research, eds. 1994.
   Google Scholar
• Self SG, Liang K-Y. Asymptotic properties of maximum likelihood estimators and likelihood ratio tests under nonstandard conditions. J Am Stat Assoc. 1987;82(398):605–610.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang Z, Zhou X-H. Random effects models for assessing diagnostic accuracy of traditional Chinese doctors in absence of a gold standard. Stat Med. 2012;31(7):661–671.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Albert PS, Dodd LE. A cautionary note on the robustness of latent class models for estimating diagnostic error without a gold standard. Biometrics. 2004;60(2):427–435.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Albert PS. Estimating diagnostic accuracy of multiple binary tests with an imperfect reference standard. Stat Med. 2009;28(5):780–797.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Albert PS, Dodd LE. On estimating diagnostic accuracy from studies with multiple raters and partial gold standard evaluation. J Am Stat Assoc. 2008;103(481):61–73.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xie Y, Chen Z, Albert PS. A crossed random effects modeling approach for estimating diagnostic accuracy from ordinal ratings without a gold standard. Stat Med. 2013;32(20):3472–3485.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones G, Johnson WO, Hanson TE, et al. Identifiability of models for multiple diagnostic testing in the absence of a gold standard. Biometrics. 2010;66(3):855–863.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Toft N, Jørgensen E, Højsgaard S. Diagnosing diagnostic tests: evaluating the assumptions underlying the estimation of sensitivity and specificity in the absence of a gold standard. Prev Vet Med. 2005;68(1):19–33.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Georgiadis MP, Johnson WO, Gardner IA, et al. Correlation-adjusted estimation of sensitivity and specificity of two diagnostic tests. J R Stat Soc Ser C Appl Stat. 2003;52(1):63–76.
   Google Scholar
• Kasahara H, Shimotsu K. Nonparametric identification of finite mixture models of dynamic discrete choices. Econometrica. 2009;77(1):135–175.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Forcina A. Identifiability of extended latent class models with individual covariates. Comput Stat Data Anal. 2008;52(12):5263–5268.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang Z, Zhou X-H. Nonparametric identifiability of finite mixture models with covariates for estimating error rate without a gold standard. 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Cruz-Medina I, Hettmansperger T, Thomas H. Semiparametric mixture models and repeated measures: the multinomial cut point model. J R Stat Soc Ser C Appl Stat. 2004;53(3):463–474.
   Google Scholar
• Hall P, Zhou X-H, et al. Nonparametric estimation of component distributions in a multivariate mixture. Ann Stat. 2003;31(1):201–224.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hettmansperger T, Thomas H. Almost nonparametric inference for repeated measures in mixture models. J R Stat Soc Ser B Stat Methodol. 2000;62(4):811–825.
   Google Scholar
• Allman ES, Matias C, Rhodes JA, et al. Identifiability of parameters in latent structure models with many observed variables. Ann Stat. 2009;37(6A):3099–3132.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bonhomme S, Jochmans K, Robin J-M, et al. Estimating multivariate latent-structure models. Ann Stat. 2016;44(2):540–563.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seidel W, Mosler K, Alker M. A cautionary note on likelihood ratio tests in mixture models. Ann Inst Stat Math. 2000;52(3):481–487.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhou X-H, Castelluccio P, Zhou C. Nonparametric estimation of ROC curves in the absence of a gold standard. Biometrics. 2005;61(2):600–609.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lehmann EL, Casella G. Theory of point estimation. New York: Springer Science & Business Media; 2006.
   Google Scholar
• McLachlan GJ, Lee SX, Rathnayake SI. Finite mixture models. Annual review of statistics and its application. 2000.
   Google Scholar
• Cheng R, Traylor L. Non-regular maximum likelihood problems. J R Stat Soc Ser B Methodol. 1995;57(1):3–24.
   Google Scholar
• Peters Jr BC, Walker HF. An iterative procedure for obtaining maximum-likelihood estimates of the parameters for a mixture of normal distributions. SIAM J Appl Math. 1978;35(2):362–378.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Redner RA, Walker HF. Mixture densities, maximum likelihood and the em algorithm. SIAM Review. 1984;26(2):195–239.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bartholomew DJ, Knott M, Moustaki I. Latent variable models and factor analysis: a unified approach. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons; 2011.
   Google Scholar
• Molenaar P, von Eye A. On the arbitrary nature of latent variables. 1994.
   Google Scholar
• Molenaar PC. Psychological methodology will change profoundly due to the necessity to focus on intra-individual variation. Integr Psychol Behav Sci. 2007;41(1):35–40.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Toomela A. Culture of science: strange history of the methodological thinking in psychology. Integr Psychol Behav Sci. 2007;41(1):6–20.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muthén B. Statistical and substantive checking in growth mixture modeling: Comment on Bauer and Curran (2003). 2003.
   Google Scholar
• Jack Jr CR, Knopman DS, Jagust WJ, et al. Tracking pathophysiological processes in Alzheimer's disease: an updated hypothetical model of dynamic biomarkers. Lancet Neurol. 2013;12(2):207–216.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jack Jr CR, Knopman DS, Jagust WJ, et al. Hypothetical model of dynamic biomarkers of the Alzheimer's pathological cascade. Lancet Neurol. 2010;9(1):119–128.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taylor JM, Park Y, Ankerst DP, et al. Real-time individual predictions of prostate cancer recurrence using joint models. Biometrics. 2013;69(1):206–213.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar