We have located links that may give you full text access.
JOURNAL ARTICLE
RESEARCH SUPPORT, NON-U.S. GOV'T
REVIEW
Confirmatory factor analysis of the GHQ-12: can I see that again?
Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry 2003 August
OBJECTIVE: This paper reviews research relating to the factor analysis of the GHQ-12. We explore the question of whether there is a consistent replicable structure to the GHQ-12 using: (i) a comparative analysis of fit between identified factor models; and (ii) a confirmatory factor analysis of GHQ-12 data from our own study.
METHOD: The factor models proposed from the literature were reviewed. The published factor loadings were used to carry out a factor matching analysis to identify similarities between the various factor models that have been identified. In addition, 490 patients visiting their general practitioner completed the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12) in the first phase of a longitudinal study evaluating service delivery to rural Tasmania. Three different methods for scoring the GHQ-12 were utilized and each resultant data set was analysed using a Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) to establish which of the various factor models provided the most consistent description of the data.
RESULT: None of the complete factor models that have been proposed have been consistently replicated across studies. Isolated factors were replicated between some studies but no single factor structure was replicated across all studies. All of the models had adequate fit to the Tasmanian data when the usual scoring was used. However, only one model had a consistently high 'goodness of fit' across scoring methods.
CONCLUSION: It was concluded that the 'best fit' was achieved by a model based on an early factor analytic study using an Australian sample. It was suggested that researchers wanting to extract scales from the GHQ-12 could use this model.
METHOD: The factor models proposed from the literature were reviewed. The published factor loadings were used to carry out a factor matching analysis to identify similarities between the various factor models that have been identified. In addition, 490 patients visiting their general practitioner completed the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12) in the first phase of a longitudinal study evaluating service delivery to rural Tasmania. Three different methods for scoring the GHQ-12 were utilized and each resultant data set was analysed using a Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) to establish which of the various factor models provided the most consistent description of the data.
RESULT: None of the complete factor models that have been proposed have been consistently replicated across studies. Isolated factors were replicated between some studies but no single factor structure was replicated across all studies. All of the models had adequate fit to the Tasmanian data when the usual scoring was used. However, only one model had a consistently high 'goodness of fit' across scoring methods.
CONCLUSION: It was concluded that the 'best fit' was achieved by a model based on an early factor analytic study using an Australian sample. It was suggested that researchers wanting to extract scales from the GHQ-12 could use this model.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app