Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://cmuir.cmu.ac.th/jspui/handle/6653943832/65828
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorNahathai Wongpakaranen_US
dc.contributor.authorTinakon Wongpakaranen_US
dc.contributor.authorSurang Lertkachatarnen_US
dc.contributor.authorThanitha Siriraken_US
dc.contributor.authorPimolpun Kuntawongen_US
dc.date.accessioned2019-08-05T04:41:55Z-
dc.date.available2019-08-05T04:41:55Z-
dc.date.issued2019-01-01en_US
dc.identifier.issn1741203Xen_US
dc.identifier.issn10416102en_US
dc.identifier.other2-s2.0-85063603498en_US
dc.identifier.other10.1017/S1041610219000140en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85063603498&origin=inwarden_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://cmuir.cmu.ac.th/jspui/handle/6653943832/65828-
dc.description.abstract© 2019 International Psychogeriatric Association. Objectives:The Core Symptom Index (CSI) is designed to measure anxiety, depression and somatization symptoms. This study examined the construct validity of CSI using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) including a bifactor model and explored differential item functioning (DIF) of the CSI. The criterion and concurrent validity were evaluated.Methods:In all, 803 elderly patients, average age 69.24 years, 70% female, were assessed for depressive disorders and completed the CSI and the geriatric depression scale (GDS). A series involving CFA for ordinal scale was applied. Factor loadings and explained common variance were analyzed for general and specific factors; and Omega was calculated for model-based reliability. DIF was analyzed using the Multiple-Indicator Multiple-Cause model. Pearson's correlation, ANOVA, and ROC analysis were used for associations and to compare CSI and GDS in predicting major depressive disorders (MDD).Results:The bifactor model provided the best fit to the data. Most items loaded on general rather than specific factors. The explained common variance was acceptable, while Omega hierarchical for the subscale and explained common variance for the subscales were low. Two DIF items were identified; 'crying' for sex items and 'self-blaming' for education items. Correlation among CSI and clinical disorders and the GDS were found. AUC for the GDS was 0.83, and for the CSI was 0.81.Conclusion:CSI appears sufficiently unidimensional. Its total score reflected a single general factor, permitting users to interpret the total score as a sufficient reliable measure of the general factors. CSI could serve as a screening tool for MDD.en_US
dc.subjectMedicineen_US
dc.subjectNursingen_US
dc.subjectPsychologyen_US
dc.titleCore Symptom Index (CSI): Testing for bifactor model and differential item functioningen_US
dc.typeJournalen_US
article.title.sourcetitleInternational Psychogeriatricsen_US
article.stream.affiliationsFaculty of Medicine, Prince of Songkia Universityen_US
article.stream.affiliationsPrasat Neurological Instituteen_US
article.stream.affiliationsChiang Mai Universityen_US
Appears in Collections:CMUL: Journal Articles

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.


Items in CMUIR are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.