Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Harmonizing bifactor models of psychopathology between distinct assessment instruments: Reliability, measurement invariance, and authenticity
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Harmonizing bifactor models of psychopathology between distinct assessment instruments: Reliability, measurement invariance, and authenticity
Do you wish to request the book?
Harmonizing bifactor models of psychopathology between distinct assessment instruments: Reliability, measurement invariance, and authenticity
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Harmonizing bifactor models of psychopathology between distinct assessment instruments: Reliability, measurement invariance, and authenticity
2023
Overview
Model configuration is important for mental health data harmonization. We provide a method to investigate the performance of different bifactor model configurations to harmonize different instruments.
We used data from six samples from the Reproducible Brain Charts initiative (N = 8,606, ages 5-22 years, 41.0% females). We harmonized items from two psychopathology instruments, Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) and GOASSESS, based on semantic content. We estimated bifactor models using confirmatory factor analysis, and calculated their model fit, factor reliability, between-instrument invariance, and authenticity (i.e., the correlation and factor score difference between the harmonized and original models).
Five out of 12 model configurations presented acceptable fit and were instrument-invariant. Correlations between the harmonized factor scores and the original full-item models were high for the p-factor (>0.89) and small to moderate (0.12-0.81) for the specific factors. 6.3%-50.9% of participants presented factor score differences between harmonized and original models higher than 0.5 z-score.
The CBCL-GOASSESS harmonization indicates that few models provide reliable specific factors and are instrument-invariant. Moreover, authenticity was high for the p-factor and moderate for specific factors. Future studies can use this framework to examine the impact of harmonizing instruments in psychiatric research.
Publisher
John Wiley & Sons, Inc,John Wiley and Sons Inc,Wiley
Subject
