Table 3.

Goodness-of-fit indices for parent-proxy Kid-KINDL^a (n = 247)

Variables	Model 0	Model 1	Model 2	Model 3	Model 4	Model 5	Model 6
χ 2	1159.51*	472.14*	779.90*	788.09*	280.58*	345.99*	281.68*
df	231	215	229	230	191	205	192
χ 2/df	5.02	2.20	3.41	3.43	1.47	1.67	1.47
GFI	.69	.85	.78	.78	.91	.89	.91
TLI	.51	.86	.74	.71	.94	.92	.94
CFI	.56	.88	.74	.73	.96	.93	.96
IFI	.56	.88	.74	.74	.96	.93	.96
RMSEA	.13	.07	.10	.10	.04	.05	.04
SRMR	.13	.09	.10	.11	.05	.07	.05

Model 0 is a 1-general-factor model

Model 1 is a 6-QoL-factor (physical, emotional, self-esteem, family, friend, and school) model

Model 2 is a 2-oblique-wording-factor (positive and negative wording) model

Model 3 is a 2-orthogonal-wording-factor (positive and negative wording) model

Model 4 is a correlated traits (QoL factors) and correlated methods (wording factors) model (CTCM model)

Model 5 is a correlated traits and one-wording-factor model (CTC [M − 1] model)

Model 6 is a correlated traits and uncorrelated methods model (CTUM model)

GFI goodness-of-fit Index, TLI Tucker-Lewis Index, CFI comparative fit index, IFI incremental fit index, RMSEA root mean square error of approximation, SRMR standardized root mean square residual

*P < .05

^aItem Fr4 (felt different from other children) was eliminated in all CFA models based on the suggestion of previous studies (Helseth & Lund [21]; Lin et al. [10]; Lee et al. [22]; Wee et al. [23])