ArticleJournal of Alzheimer's disease reports
Measurement invariance of the Research Attitudes Questionnaire in an age and ethnically diverse, community-dwelling sample.
Article in Journal of Alzheimer's disease reports. 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: The Research Attitudes Questionnaire (RAQ), developed to predict individuals' willingness to participate, is often used in Alzheimer's Disease and related dementia research. Objective: The present investigation aimed to examine the suitability of the RAQ across age groups and three different racialized identities, i.e., to see whether the RAQ showed measurement invariance. Methods: We administered the RAQ to six groups of participants: 457 younger and 594 older African Americans, 207 younger and 339 older American Indian/Alaska Native, and 173 younger and 679 older non-Hispanic White adults. Results: Confirmatory factor analysis indicated that the best-fitting model was one-factor. All six groups fit the model well, with Comparative Fit Indices > 0.95. A series of cross-sample invariance tests using increasing constraints on factor loadings, means, and residuals revealed evidence of configural invariance, metric invariance, and partial scalar invariance. Conclusions: These findings support the suitability of the RAQ for cross-cultural and/or age comparisons of willingness to engage in research in the groups and context studied.
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.