ArticleEuropean journal of ageing2025
Measurement invariance of a general cognitive performance measure across 27 European countries and Israel.
Article in European journal of ageing, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The use of global or composite cognitive measures is extended in both clinical and academic settings. In this line, several population-based surveys include measures of cognition that have frequently been combined into a single score. However, some methodological aspects of this practice have gone unnoticed. One of such aspects has been to provide evidence of the measurement invariance of the combined measure across countries involved in the surveys. Using data from the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe (SHARE), this study aims at providing evidence of the factor structure of a Global Cognitive Performance (GCP) measure and testing whether this structure remains invariant across 27 European countries and Israel. The sample was composed of 55,569 adults aged between 60 and 102 years old (M = 72.07, SD = 7.97). 56.58% were female. Confirmatory Factor Analysis was used to establish the measurement model of GCP in the general sample and within each country. Afterwards, measurement invariance across countries was evaluated using the traditional as well as the alignment approach. The unidimensional model of GCP deemed an adequate fit to the data in the general sample as well as within each country, except for Malta, which was excluded from further analyses. After dismissing full measurement invariance, we studied approximate measurement invariance using alignment. 31.85% of factor loading estimates were noninvariant, while 54.81% of item intercept estimates showed deviations from invariance. Given evidence of items' intercepts and factor loadings noninvariance, researchers working with SHARE data should abstain from making cross-country comparisons of GCP. Some plausible explanations for noninvariance of items' intercepts are further discussed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.