Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42240741›Full record

ArticlePrevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research2026

Advantages in Bayesian Approaches to Confirmatory Factor Analysis.

Diana Alvarez-Bartolo, Cheuk Hei Cheng, Roy Levy, Cady Berkel, Abigail H Gewirtz

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Prevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors.

Diana Alvarez-BartoloSchool of Nursing, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA. dalvar16@jh.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2423-7937
Cheuk Hei ChengDepartment of Psychology, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3345-6664
Roy LevyDepartment of Psychology, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7737-9176
Cady BerkelCollege of Health Solutions, Arizona State University, Phoenix, AZ, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9664-9485
Abigail H GewirtzDepartment of Psychology, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA.

Funding

Making Enrollment a Snap for people with disabilities with a SNAP Cross-EnrollmentR01NR020885 · NINR · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI Laura Samuel · 2023 to 2026
$1.6M
NINR NIH HHS R01NR020885
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To conduct rigorous evaluations of preventive interventions, it is foundational to establish the psychometric or measurement quality of the measures. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) is a popular method of modeling and evaluating measurement quality. Such analyses are typically conducted within a frequentist framework, which can pose challenges in an applied research setting due to the strong conditions required to establish measurement quality (e.g., sufficient sample size, exact measurement invariance (MI), and high sensitivity to group differences). An alternative set of approaches involves Bayesian methods, which offer several advantages. However, they remain underutilized by prevention scientists. The main goal of this paper is to illustrate several of the advantages that Bayesian methods offer in the context of analyses of data from the Alabama Parenting Questionnaire (APQ) through five examples. We illustrate the advantages of Bayesian methods over maximum likelihood in terms of result interpretation, and highlight how Bayesian methods allow us to express uncertainty in ways we always intended, avoiding misconceptions associated with frequentist approaches (Example 1). We also show how Bayesian methods help to avoid estimation problems (Example 2), examine parameter MI in both conventional and more flexible ways (Examples 3 and 4), and incorporate substantive prior information into our analysis (Example 5). By highlighting these advantages, we aim to motivate prevention researchers to consider using Bayesian methods for CFA and other analyses.

Indexed as

BayesFactor analysisPsychometricsStatistics

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.