These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

199 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31120298)

  • 1. Factor analysis in psychological assessment research: Common pitfalls and recommendations.
    Sellbom M; Tellegen A
    Psychol Assess; 2019 Dec; 31(12):1428-1441. PubMed ID: 31120298
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The bifactor structure of the Self-Compassion Scale: Bayesian approaches to overcome exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM) limitations.
    Marsh HW; Fraser MI; Rakhimov A; Ciarrochi J; Guo J
    Psychol Assess; 2023 Aug; 35(8):674-691. PubMed ID: 37410399
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Evaluating bifactor models: Calculating and interpreting statistical indices.
    Rodriguez A; Reise SP; Haviland MG
    Psychol Methods; 2016 Jun; 21(2):137-50. PubMed ID: 26523435
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Applying Bifactor Statistical Indices in the Evaluation of Psychological Measures.
    Rodriguez A; Reise SP; Haviland MG
    J Pers Assess; 2016; 98(3):223-37. PubMed ID: 26514921
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Misbegotten methodologies and forgotten lessons from Tom Swift's electric factor analysis machine: A demonstration with competing structural models of psychopathology.
    Greene AL; Watts AL; Forbes MK; Kotov R; Krueger RF; Eaton NR
    Psychol Methods; 2023 Dec; 28(6):1374-1403. PubMed ID: 34990188
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Exploratory structural equation modeling: an integration of the best features of exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis.
    Marsh HW; Morin AJ; Parker PD; Kaur G
    Annu Rev Clin Psychol; 2014; 10():85-110. PubMed ID: 24313568
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The role of the bifactor model in resolving dimensionality issues in health outcomes measures.
    Reise SP; Morizot J; Hays RD
    Qual Life Res; 2007; 16 Suppl 1():19-31. PubMed ID: 17479357
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Exploratory structural equation modeling, bifactor models, and standard confirmatory factor analysis models: application to the BASC-2 Behavioral and Emotional Screening System Teacher Form.
    Wiesner M; Schanding GT
    J Sch Psychol; 2013 Dec; 51(6):751-63. PubMed ID: 24295147
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Exploratory Structural Equation Modeling: Practical Guidelines and Tutorial With a Convenient Online Tool for Mplus.
    van Zyl LE; Ten Klooster PM
    Front Psychiatry; 2021; 12():795672. PubMed ID: 35069293
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Rewards of bridging the divide between measurement and clinical theory: demonstration of a bifactor model for the Brief Symptom Inventory.
    Thomas ML
    Psychol Assess; 2012 Mar; 24(1):101-13. PubMed ID: 21767026
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. The General Factor of Well-Being: Multinational Evidence Using Bifactor ESEM on the Mental Health Continuum-Short Form.
    Longo Y; Jovanović V; Sampaio de Carvalho J; Karaś D
    Assessment; 2020 Apr; 27(3):596-606. PubMed ID: 29281897
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Testing the Factor Structure and Measurement Invariance Across Gender of the Big Five Inventory Through Exploratory Structural Equation Modeling.
    Chiorri C; Marsh HW; Ubbiali A; Donati D
    J Pers Assess; 2016; 98(1):88-99. PubMed ID: 25932664
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Construct Validity of the Social Provisions Scale: A Bifactor Exploratory Structural Equation Modeling Approach.
    Perera HN
    Assessment; 2016 Dec; 23(6):720-733. PubMed ID: 26063712
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Methodological and statistical advances in the consideration of cultural diversity in assessment: A critical review of group classification and measurement invariance testing.
    Han K; Colarelli SM; Weed NC
    Psychol Assess; 2019 Dec; 31(12):1481-1496. PubMed ID: 31763873
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. A new look at the big five factor structure through exploratory structural equation modeling.
    Marsh HW; Lüdtke O; Muthén B; Asparouhov T; Morin AJ; Trautwein U; Nagengast B
    Psychol Assess; 2010 Sep; 22(3):471-91. PubMed ID: 20822261
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Parceling Cannot Reduce Factor Indeterminacy in Factor Analysis: A Research Note.
    Rigdon EE; Becker JM; Sarstedt M
    Psychometrika; 2019 Sep; 84(3):772-780. PubMed ID: 31292860
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. The factor structure of the Values in Action Inventory of Strengths (VIA-IS): An item-level exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM) bifactor analysis.
    Ng V; Cao M; Marsh HW; Tay L; Seligman MEP
    Psychol Assess; 2017 Aug; 29(8):1053-1058. PubMed ID: 27736126
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Identifying an appropriate measurement modeling approach for the Mini-Mental State Examination.
    Rubright JD; Nandakumar R; Karlawish J
    Psychol Assess; 2016 Feb; 28(2):125-33. PubMed ID: 26029945
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. On the Complexity of Item Response Theory Models.
    Bonifay W; Cai L
    Multivariate Behav Res; 2017; 52(4):465-484. PubMed ID: 28426237
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Are fit indices used to test psychopathology structure biased? A simulation study.
    Greene AL; Eaton NR; Li K; Forbes MK; Krueger RF; Markon KE; Waldman ID; Cicero DC; Conway CC; Docherty AR; Fried EI; Ivanova MY; Jonas KG; Latzman RD; Patrick CJ; Reininghaus U; Tackett JL; Wright AGC; Kotov R
    J Abnorm Psychol; 2019 Oct; 128(7):740-764. PubMed ID: 31318246
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.