↓ Skip to main content

A Bifactor and item response analysis of the geriatric anxiety inventory

Overview of attention for article published in International Psychogeriatrics, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
17 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A Bifactor and item response analysis of the geriatric anxiety inventory
Published in
International Psychogeriatrics, June 2017
DOI 10.1017/s1041610217001004
Pubmed ID
Authors

H. Molde, K. M. Hynninen, T. Torsheim, A.B. Bendixen, K. Engedal, N.A. Pachana, I. H. Nordhus

Abstract

Due to previously reported mixed findings, there is a need for further empirical research on the factorial structure of the commonly used Geriatric Anxiety Inventory (GAI). Therefore, the psychometric properties of the GAI and its short form version (GAI-SF) were evaluated in a psychogeriatric mixed in-and-out patient sample (n = 543). Unidimensionality was tested using a bifactor analysis. Rasch modeling was used to assess scale properties. Sex, cognitive functioning and depressive symptoms were tested for differential item functioning (DIF). The bifactor analysis identified an essential unidimensional (general) factor structure but also specific local factors. The general factor comprises all the 20 items as one factor, and the results showed that the variance in the general and specific factors (subscale) scores is best explained by the single general factor. These findings were demonstrated for both versions of the GAI. Furthermore, the Rasch models identified extensive item overlap, indicating redundant items in the full version of the GAI. The GAI-SF also seems to extract much of the same information as the full form. Test scores and items have the same meaning for older adults across different demographic status. The findings support the use of a total sum score for both GAI and GAI-SF. Notably, when using the GAI-SF, no information is lost, in comparison with the full scale, thus, supporting the option of choosing the short form (version) when considered most appropriate in demanding clinical contexts.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 17 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 24%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 12%
Professor 2 12%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 1 6%
Student > Bachelor 1 6%
Other 3 18%
Unknown 4 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 3 18%
Psychology 3 18%
Social Sciences 2 12%
Unspecified 1 6%
Arts and Humanities 1 6%
Other 2 12%
Unknown 5 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 June 2017.
All research outputs
#15,465,171
of 22,981,247 outputs
Outputs from International Psychogeriatrics
#1,283
of 1,964 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#198,978
of 316,825 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Psychogeriatrics
#29
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,981,247 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,964 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 316,825 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.