ArticleQuality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation2013
Strengthening the assessment of factorial invariance across population subgroups: a commentary on Varni et al. (2013).
Article in Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Measuring Depression-Severity in Critically Ill Patients' Families with the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ): Tests for Unidimensionality and Longitudinal Measurement Invariance, with Implications for CONSORT.Journal of pain and symptom management · 2016Trial
- Children's Hope in South Africa: A Population-Based Study.Frontiers in psychology · 2020Article
- Quality of Communication and Trust in Patients With Serious Illness: An Exploratory Study of the Relationships of Race/Ethnicity, Socioeconomic Status, and Religiosity.Journal of pain and symptom management · 2018Observational
- Measuring health literacy in community agencies: a Bayesian study of the factor structure and measurement invariance of the health literacy questionnaire (HLQ).BMC health services research · 2016Article
- Commentary on strengthening the assessment of factorial invariance across population subgroups: a commentary on Varni et al. (2013).Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
- Comment on
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis article provides a commentary in response to "Varni et al. (Qual Life Res. doi: 10.1007/s11136-013-0370-4 , 2013)." METHODS AND
resultsThe commentary argues that the approximate model fit indexes commonly used in maximum-likelihood confirmatory factor analysis and factorial invariance testing are seriously flawed, as they overlook potentially serious model misspecifications that could bias parameter estimates and compromise inference.
conclusionsFlexible and convenient Bayesian estimation approaches are presented that can substantially aid in: (1) resolving commonly encountered specification errors in confirmatory factor models and (2) locating specific measurement parameters that are non-invariant across population subgroups. It is recommended that these methods should be more widely adopted for evaluating the factorial invariance of patient-reported outcome measures and other types of instruments.
Indexed as
Identifiers
23836434What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.