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 *

116 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32495029)

  • 1. Addressing missing data in specification search in measurement invariance testing with Likert-type scale variables: A comparison of two approaches.
    Chen PY; Wu W; Brandt H; Jia F
    Behav Res Methods; 2020 Dec; 52(6):2567-2587. PubMed ID: 32495029
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Testing Measurement Invariance with Ordinal Missing Data: A Comparison of Estimators and Missing Data Techniques.
    Chen PY; Wu W; Garnier-Villarreal M; Kite BA; Jia F
    Multivariate Behav Res; 2020; 55(1):87-101. PubMed ID: 31099262
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. A comparison of sequential and nonsequential specification searches in testing factorial invariance.
    Yoon M; Kim ES
    Behav Res Methods; 2014 Dec; 46(4):1199-206. PubMed ID: 24356995
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Evaluating FIML and multiple imputation in joint ordinal-continuous measurements models with missing data.
    Lim AJ; Cheung MW
    Behav Res Methods; 2022 Jun; 54(3):1063-1077. PubMed ID: 34545537
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Analysing multitrait-multimethod data with structural equation models for ordinal variables applying the WLSMV estimator: what sample size is needed for valid results?
    Nussbeck FW; Eid M; Lischetzke T
    Br J Math Stat Psychol; 2006 May; 59(Pt 1):195-213. PubMed ID: 16709286
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Confirmatory factor analysis with ordinal data: Comparing robust maximum likelihood and diagonally weighted least squares.
    Li CH
    Behav Res Methods; 2016 Sep; 48(3):936-49. PubMed ID: 26174714
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Dealing with missing data in multi-informant studies: A comparison of approaches.
    Chen PY; Jia F; Wu W; Wang MH; Chao TY
    Behav Res Methods; 2024 Oct; 56(7):6498-6519. PubMed ID: 38418689
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Adjusting for Measurement Noninvariance with Alignment in Growth Modeling.
    Lai MHC
    Multivariate Behav Res; 2023; 58(1):30-47. PubMed ID: 34236919
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Adjusting for partial invariance in latent parameter estimation: Comparing forward specification search and approximate invariance methods.
    Lai MHC; Liu Y; Tse WW
    Behav Res Methods; 2022 Feb; 54(1):414-434. PubMed ID: 34236670
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. The Impact of Model Parameterization and Estimation Methods on Tests of Measurement Invariance With Ordered Polytomous Data.
    Koziol NA; Bovaird JA
    Educ Psychol Meas; 2018 Apr; 78(2):272-296. PubMed ID: 29795956
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Does strict invariance matter? Valid group mean comparisons with ordered-categorical items.
    Tse WW; Lai MHC; Zhang Y
    Behav Res Methods; 2024 Apr; 56(4):3117-3139. PubMed ID: 38030923
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Impact of error structure misspecification when testing measurement invariance and latent-factor mean difference using MIMIC and multiple-group confirmatory factor analysis.
    Joo SH; Kim ES
    Behav Res Methods; 2019 Dec; 51(6):2688-2699. PubMed ID: 30242617
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. A Comparative Study on the Performance of GSCA and CSA in Parameter Recovery for Structural Equation Models With Ordinal Observed Variables.
    Jung K; Panko P; Lee J; Hwang H
    Front Psychol; 2018; 9():2461. PubMed ID: 30568625
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Combining proration and full information maximum likelihood in handling missing data in Likert scale items: A hybrid approach.
    Wu W; Gu F; Fukui S
    Behav Res Methods; 2022 Apr; 54(2):922-940. PubMed ID: 34357540
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Type I error rates and power of several versions of scaled chi-square difference tests in investigations of measurement invariance.
    Brace JC; Savalei V
    Psychol Methods; 2017 Sep; 22(3):467-485. PubMed ID: 27893215
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. More efficient parameter estimates for factor analysis of ordinal variables by ridge generalized least squares.
    Yuan KH; Jiang G; Cheng Y
    Br J Math Stat Psychol; 2017 Nov; 70(3):525-564. PubMed ID: 28547838
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Test equality and sample size calculation based on risk difference in a randomized clinical trial with noncompliance and missing outcomes.
    Lui KJ; Chang KC
    Biom J; 2008 Apr; 50(2):224-36. PubMed ID: 18264992
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Statistical estimation of structural equation models with a mixture of continuous and categorical observed variables.
    Li CH
    Behav Res Methods; 2021 Oct; 53(5):2191-2213. PubMed ID: 33791955
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Measurement invariance via multigroup SEM: Issues and solutions with chi-square-difference tests.
    Yuan KH; Chan W
    Psychol Methods; 2016 Sep; 21(3):405-26. PubMed ID: 27266799
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Impact of Not Addressing Partially Cross-Classified Multilevel Structure in Testing Measurement Invariance: A Monte Carlo Study.
    Im MH; Kim ES; Kwok OM; Yoon M; Willson VL
    Front Psychol; 2016; 7():328. PubMed ID: 27047404
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.