背景:潜在类别分析(LCA)可用于识别具有相似心理健康症状和/或优势的儿童亚组。该方法在儿童心理健康研究中越来越常用,但是对可复制性有保留,可靠性,和发现的有效性。目的:进行了系统的文献综述,以调查LCA在儿童人群心理健康研究中的应用程度。以及是否可复制,已经证明了可靠和有效的发现。方法:遵循系统评价和荟萃分析(PRISMA)指南的首选报告项目。检索文献,在1998年1月至2017年12月之间发布,使用MEDLINE进行,EMBASE,PsycInfo,Scopus,ERIC,ASSIA,谷歌学者。最初总共确定了2,748项研究,其中23人符合审查资格。这篇综述检查了研究用来选择心理健康课程数量的方法,他们发现的班级,以及是否有证据证明这些课程的有效性和可靠性。结果:经过审查的研究使用LCA调查了两种不同的心理健康症状,以及与特定疾病相关的疾病。使用类似指标的研究语料库很小。研究之间发现了用于选择最终LCA模型的标准的差异。所有研究都发现了有意义或有用的亚组,但是在明确证明类的有效性和可靠性的程度上存在差异。结论:LCA是在人群水平上研究和分类儿童心理健康的有用工具。建议改进LCA的应用和报告,并增加对未来调查结果的信心,包括在枚举类时使用一系列索引和标准,明确报告可复制性方法,并努力建立已识别课程的有效性和可靠性。
Background: Latent class analysis (LCA) can be used to identify subgroups of children with similar patterns of mental health symptoms and/or strengths. The method is becoming more commonly used in child mental health research, but there are reservations about the replicability, reliability, and validity of findings. Objective: A systematic literature
review was conducted to investigate the extent to which LCA has been used to study population mental health in children, and whether replicable, reliable and valid findings have been demonstrated. Methods: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. A search of literature, published between January 1998 and December 2017, was carried out using MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycInfo, Scopus, ERIC, ASSIA, and Google Scholar. A total of 2,748 studies were initially identified, of which 23 were eligible for
review. The
review examined the methods which studies had used to choose the number of mental health classes, the classes that they found, and whether there was evidence for the validity and reliability of the classes. Results: Reviewed studies used LCA to investigate both disparate mental health symptoms, and those associated with specific disorders. The corpus of studies using similar indicators was small. Differences in the criteria used to select the final LCA model were found between studies. All studies found meaningful or useful subgroups, but there were differences in the extent to which the validity and reliability of classes were explicitly demonstrated. Conclusions : LCA is a useful tool for studying and classifying child mental health at the population level. Recommendations are made to improve the application and reporting of LCA and to increase confidence in findings in the future, including use of a range of indices and criteria when enumerating classes, clear reporting of methods for replicability, and making efforts to establish the validity and reliability of identified classes.