Checking Assumptions in Latent Class Regression Models via a Markov Chain Monte Carlo Estimation Approach: An Application to Depression and Socio-Economic Status

Latent class regression models are useful tools for assessing associations between covariates and latent variables. However, evaluation of key model assumptions cannot be performed using methods from standard regression models due to the unobserved nature of latent outcome variables. This paper presents graphical diagnostic tools to evaluate whether or not latent class regression models adhere to standard assumptions of the model: conditional independence and non-differential measurement. An integral part of these methods is the use of a Markov Chain Monte Carlo estimation procedure. Unlike standard maximum likelihood implementations for latent class regression model estimation, the MCMC approach allows us to calculate posterior distributions and point estimates of any functions of parameters. It is this convenience that allows us to provide the diagnostic methods that we introduce. As a motivating example we present an analysis focusing on the association between depression and socioeconomic status, using data from the Epidemiologic Catchment Area study. We consider a latent class regression analysis investigating the association between depression and socioeconomic status measures, where the latent variable depression is regressed on education and income indicators, in addition to age, gender, and marital status variables. While the fitted latent class regression model yields interesting results, the model parameters are found to be invalid due to the violation of model assumptions. The violation of these assumptions is clearly identified by the presented diagnostic plots. These methods can be applied to standard latent class and latent class regression models, and the general principle can be extended to evaluate model assumptions in other types of models.

Studying Effects of Primary Care Physicians and Patients on the Trade-Off Between Charges for Primary Care and Specialty Care Using a Hierarchical Multivariate Two-Part Model

Objective. To examine effects of primary care physicians (PCPs) and patients on the association between charges for primary care and specialty care in a point-of-service (POS) health plan. Data Source. Claims from 1996 for 3,308 adult male POS plan members, each of whom was assigned to one of the 50 family practitioner-PCPs with the largest POS plan member-loads. Study Design. A hierarchical multivariate two-part model was fitted using a Gibbs sampler to estimate PCPs' effects on patients' annual charges for two types of services, primary care and specialty care, the associations among PCPs' effects, and within-patient associations between charges for the two services. Adjusted Clinical Groups (ACGs) were used to adjust for case-mix. Principal Findings. PCPs with higher case-mix adjusted rates of specialist use were less likely to see their patients at least once during the year (estimated correlation: –.40; 95% CI: –.71, –.008) and provided fewer services to patients that they saw (estimated correlation: –.53; 95% CI: –.77, –.21). Ten of 11 PCPs whose case-mix adjusted effects on primary care charges were significantly less than or greater than zero (p < .05) had estimated, case-mix adjusted effects on specialty care charges that were of opposite sign (but not significantly different than zero). After adjustment for ACG and PCP effects, the within-patient, estimated odds ratio for any use of primary care given any use of specialty care was .57 (95% CI: .45, .73). Conclusions. PCPs and patients contributed independently to a trade-off between utilization of primary care and specialty care. The trade-off appeared to partially offset significant differences in the amount of care provided by PCPs. These findings were possible because we employed a hierarchical multivariate model rather than separate univariate models.