Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27147255›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2016

Using confirmatory factor analysis to manage discriminant validity issues in social pharmacy research.

Stephen R Carter

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of clinical pharmacy, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Perceived service quality scale for community pharmacies: tool translation of the short form and service quality exploration.Saudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Psychometric properties of the Chinese version of the Positive Thinking Scale in individuals after hip fracture surgery.Psicologia, reflexao e critica : revista semestral do Departamento de Psicologia da UFRGS · 2022
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Stephen R CarterFaculty of Pharmacy, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia. stephen.carter@sydney.edu.au.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background Confirmatory factory analysis (CFA) and structural equation modelling (SEM) are increasingly used in social pharmacy research. One of the key benefits of CFA is that it allows researchers to provide evidence for the validity of internal factor structure of measurement scales. In particular, CFA can be used to provide evidence for the validity of the assertion that a hypothesized multi-dimensional scale discriminates between sub-scales. Aim This manuscript aims to provide guidance for researchers who wish to use CFA to provide evidence for the internal factor structure of measurement scales. Methods The manuscript places discriminant validity in the context of providing overall validity evidence for measurement scales. Four examples from the recent social pharmacy literature are used to critically examine the various methods which are used to establish discriminant validity. Using a hypothetical scenario, the manuscript demonstrates how commonly used output from CFA computer programs can be used to provide evidence for separateness of sub-scales within a multi-dimensional scale. Conclusion The manuscript concludes with recommendations for the conduct and reporting of studies which use CFA to provide evidence of internal factor structure of measurement scales.

Indexed as

Factor Analysis, StatisticalModels, StatisticalReproducibility of ResultsAnalysis of VarianceHumansPharmacy ResearchAverage variance extractedDiscriminant validityStructural equation modelling

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.