SUMMARY A framework based on mixture methods is proposed for evaluating goodness of fit in the analysis of contingency tables. For a given model H applied to a contingency table P, we consider the two-point mixture P = (1 – π)π 1 + ππ 2, with π the mixing proportion (0 ≤ π ≤ 1) and π 1 and π 2 the tables of probabilities for each latent class or component. In the unstructured approach recommended here, the mixture model applies H to π 1 but does not impose any restrictions on π 2. A contingency table P can generally be represented as such a two-point mixture for an interval of π-values. We define our index of lack of fit, π*, to be the smallest such π, i.e. π* is the fraction of the population that cannot be described by model H. This approach can be contrasted with the structured approach that applies model H to both π 1 and π 2 and leads to conventional latent class models when H is the hypothesis of independence. The case where H is the hypothesis of row–column independence and P is a two-way contingency table is covered in detail, but the procedure is quite general.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rudas et al. (1994) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: