AIMS: The present study aimed to examine the fit of different measurement models for the AUDIT and its measurement invariance across a wide range of subgroups by country, language, gender, and sexual orientation.
METHODS: Responses concerning past-year alcohol use from the participants of the cross-sectional International Sex Survey were considered (N = 62,943; Mage: 32.73; SD = 12.59). Confirmatory factor analysis, as well as measurement invariance tests were performed for 21 countries, 14 languages, three genders, and four sexual-orientation subgroups that met the minimum sample size requirement for inclusion in these analyses.
RESULTS: A two-factor model with factors describing 'alcohol use' (items 1-3) and 'alcohol problems' (items 4-10) showed the best model fit across countries, languages, genders, and sexual orientations. For the former two, scalar and latent mean levels of invariance were reached considering different criteria. For gender and sexual orientation, a latent mean level of invariance was reached.
CONCLUSIONS: In line with the two-factor model, the calculation of separate alcohol-use and alcohol-problem scores is recommended when using the AUDIT. The high levels of measurement invariance achieved for the AUDIT support its use in cross-cultural research, capable also of meaningful comparisons among genders and sexual orientations.
Methods: The questionnaire was developed from the literature together with outcomes from focus group discussions. It was divided into two domains which are knowledge on ME and attitude towards ME reporting. Content validity index (I-CVI), exploratory factor analysis (EFA), Cronbach alpha and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) to assess test-retest reliability were obtained during the validation process.
Results: Overall Cronbach alpha for internal consistency was good (0.742), where subscale of the questionnaire demonstrated adequate internal consistency, with Cronbach alpha value 0.83 for knowledge and 0.70 for reporting behaviour attitude. The I-CVI showed good scores (knowledge=0.88) and (attitude=0.81), while ICC was moderately accepted with a value of 0.77. Two factors were extracted from the 16 items in EFA.
Conclusion: The questionnaire to assess knowledge on ME and attitude towards ME reporting among pharmacists is valid and reliable. It demonstrates good psychometric properties.
METHODS: A total of 603 participants from the United States completed the IES-2, alongside measures of body appreciation, body acceptance from others, and self-esteem. Our analyses compared the fit of various hypothesised models of IES-2 scores.
RESULTS: Models of IES-2 scores based on confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) uniformly showed poor fit. ESEM models showed superior fit to CFA representations and a B-ESEM model showed improved fit over higher-order CFA and B-CFA representations of IES-2 scores. The optimal model was a B-ESEM model that accounted for, through correlated uniqueness (CU), the methodological artefact introduced by negatively-worded IES-2 items. This B-ESEM-CU model was fully invariant across gender and showed adequate construct validity.
CONCLUSION: The B-ESEM-CU framework appears well-suited to understand the multidimensionality of IES-2 scores. A model of IES-2 scores that yields a reliable latent indicator of global intuitive eating while allowing for simultaneous consideration of additional specific factors will likely provide more accurate accounting of the nature and outcomes of intuitive eating.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, cohort study.