Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2014 Oct 1.
Published in final edited form as: J Subst Abuse Treat. 2013 Jul 1;45(4):350–355. doi: 10.1016/j.jsat.2013.05.004

Table 3. Comparisons of LCA Models with different number of latent classes (n=262).

Model AIC BIC ABIC LMR LR p-value ALMR LR p-value BLRT p-value
1-Class LCA 1924.54 1949.52 1927.33 - - -
2- Class LCA 1716.07 1769.60 1722.04 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001
3- Class LCA 1694.94 1777.01 1704.09 0.0001 0.0002 <0.0001
4- Class LCA 1697.21 1807.83 1709.55 0.0128 0.0141 0.5000

Note.

-

Not applicable.

AIC: Akaike information criterion

BIC: Bayesian information criterion

ABIC: Sample-size adjusted Bayesian information criterion

LMR LR: Lo-Mendell-Rubin LR test

ALMR LR: Adjusted Lo-Mendell-Rubin LR test

BLRT: Bootstrap likelihood ratio test