Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30212480›Full record

ArticlePloS one2018

Measurement invariance of the SF-12 among different demographic groups: The HELIUS study.

Henrike Galenkamp, Karien Stronks, Lidwine B Mokkink, Eske M Derks

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

28 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Green Space Quality and Health: A Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Pooled it
  2. Association ofPsychological medicine · 2020
    Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

4 authors.

Henrike GalenkampDepartment of Public Health, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-5904-3465
Karien StronksDepartment of Public Health, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Lidwine B MokkinkDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam UMC, VU University, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Eske M DerksDepartment of Psychiatry, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Funding

ZonMw 200500003
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimTo investigate whether items of the SF-12, widely used to assess health outcome in clinical practice and public health research, provide unbiased measurements of underlying constructs in different demographic groups regarding gender, age, educational level and ethnicity.

methodsWe included 23,146 men and women aged 18-70 of Dutch, South-Asian Surinamese, African Surinamese, Ghanaian, Turkish, or Moroccan origin from the HELIUS study. Both multiple group confirmatory factor analyses (MGCFA), with increasingly stringent model constraints (i.e. assessing Configural, Metric, Strong and Strict measurement invariance (MI)), and regression analysis were conducted to establish comparability of SF-12 items across demographic groups.

resultsMI regarding gender, age and education was tested in the ethnic Dutch group (N = 4,615). In each subsequent step of testing MI, change in goodness-of-fit measures did not exceed 0.010 (RMSEA) or 0.004 (CFI). Moreover, goodness-of-fit indices showed good fit for strict invariance models: RMSEA<0.055; CFI>0.97. Regarding ethnicity, RMSEA values of metric and subsequent models fell above 0.055, indicating violation of measurement invariance in factor loadings, thresholds and residual variances. Regression analysis revealed possible age-, education- and ethnicity-related DIF. Adjustment for this DIF had little impact on the magnitude of age and educational differences in physical and mental health, but ethnic inequalities in physical health-and to a lesser extent mental health-were reduced after DIF adjustment.

conclusionsWe found no evidence of violation of measurement invariance of the SF-12 regarding gender, age and educational level. If minor DIF would remain undetected in our MGCFA analyses, we showed that this would have negligible effect on the magnitude of demographic health inequalities. Regarding ethnicity, the SF-12 was not measurement invariant. After accounting for DIF, we observed a reduction of ethnic inequalities in health, in particular in physical health. Caution is warranted when comparing SF-12 scores across population groups with various ethnic backgrounds.

Indexed as

EthnicityHealthcare DisparitiesAdolescentAdultAgedAge FactorsDenmarkFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedSex Factors

Identifiers

PMID30212480
PMCPMC6136718

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.