This study provided evidence for satisfactory reliability and structural validity for the three-factor model of the 11-item version, which was proven to be superior to the 14-item version for this data. Both the versions had good internal consistency reliability and a satisfactory internal consistency (W = 0.78-0.96, omega coefficient indicates the internal consistency reliability) was obtained from the optimal model. In addition, a three-factor ESEM model of the 11-item version, but not the 14-item version, showed better factor structure and fitness than the other models examined. Confirmatory factor analysis of the two versions of CFS did not support the two-factor theorized models. Confirmatory factor analysis and exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM) were performed to test the fit of models of the two versions. Socio-demographic, health-related, gynecological data were collected, and 11-item and 14-item Chalder Fatigue Scale (CFS) were used to assess fatigue. Based on a cross-sectional health survey with a constructive questionnaire, 1887 individuals aged 18 years or above were selected. The objectives of the present study is to compare the reliability and construct validity between these two versions and to confirm which may be better for the mainland Chinese setting. The 14-item Chalder Fatigue Scale (CFS) is widely used, while the 11-item version is seldom to be found in current research in mainland China.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. Archives
June 2023
Categories |