Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2014 Apr 1.
Published in final edited form as: Qual Life Res. 2012 May 3;22(3):10.1007/s11136-012-0191-x. doi: 10.1007/s11136-012-0191-x

Table 3.

Results of testing measurement invariance of the pain interference items across PROMIS Wave I and ACPA samples using MG-CFA

Invariance level Overall fit indexes Comparative fit indexes


χ2 df CFI TLI RMSEA RMSEA 90 % CI Model comparison Δχ2 Δdf p Δ CFI
1. Configural 10,481.76 1,120 0.96 0.95 0.103 0.102 0.105 2 versus 1 1,422.39 35 <.01 Δ 0.00
2. Metric 10,539.40 1,155 0.96 0.95 0.102 0.100 0.104 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.
3. Scalar 24,484.92 1,295 0.89 0.90 0.151 0.150 0.153 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.

CFI comparative fit index, TLI Tucker–Lewis Index, RMSEA root mean square error of approximation, CI confidence interval, n.a. not applicable

Measurement invariance tests included 35 items after deleing PI9, PI11, PI16, PI42, PI47, and PI55 items from the initial 41 items