Skip to main content
. 2020 Apr 3;18:91. doi: 10.1186/s12955-020-01318-y

Table 2.

Comparison of model fit for baseline model

χ2 (df) p value RMSEA [95% CI] CFI TLI
Model 1: Ware et al. with correlated factors 311.71 (53) <.001 .107 [.095–.118]a .790a .739
Model 2: model 1 + cross-loading items 1, 10, 12 198.31 (50) <.001 .083 [.071–.096]a .880a .841
Model 3: model 2 + residual covariances for items from same SF-36 scale 161.93 (46) <.001 .077 [.064–.090]a .906a .865
Model 4: model 3 + cross-loading items 4, 5 and residual covariance for items 9, 10 83.24 (43) <.001 .047 [.031–.062] .967 .950

Model 1: items 1,2,3,4,5,8 on physical health factor and items 6,7,9,10,11,12 on mental health factor

All models estimated using WLSMV

aPoor model fit indicated by RMSEA > .05 and CFI < .95