MIMIC Model of the CES-D.

<p>MIMIC Model of the CES-D.</p

An Assessment of the Measurement Equivalence of English and French Versions of the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression (CES-D) Scale in Systemic Sclerosis

<div><p>Objectives</p><p>Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression (CES-D) Scale scores in English- and French-speaking Canadian systemic sclerosis (SSc) patients are commonly pooled in analyses, but no studies have evaluated the metric equivalence of the English and French CES-D. The study objective was to examine the metric equivalence of the CES-D in English- and French-speaking SSc patients.</p><p>Methods</p><p>The CES-D was completed by 1007 English-speaking and 248 French-speaking patients from the Canadian Scleroderma Research Group Registry. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was used to assess the factor structure in both samples. The Multiple-Indicator Multiple-Cause (MIMIC) model was utilized to assess differential item functioning (DIF).</p><p>Results</p><p>A two-factor model (Positive and Negative affect) showed excellent fit in both samples. Statistically significant, but small-magnitude, DIF was found for 3 of 20 CES-D items, including items 3 (<i>Blues</i>), 10 (<i>Fearful</i>), and 11 (<i>Sleep</i>). Prior to accounting for DIF, French-speaking patients had 0.08 of a standard deviation (SD) lower latent scores for the Positive factor (95% confidence interval [CI]−0.25 to 0.08) and 0.09 SD higher scores (95% CI−0.07 to 0.24) for the Negative factor than English-speaking patients. After DIF correction, there was no change on the Positive factor and a non-significant increase of 0.04 SD on the Negative factor for French-speaking patients (difference = 0.13 SD, 95% CI−0.03 to 0.28).</p><p>Conclusions</p><p>The English and French versions of the CES-D, despite minor DIF on several items, are substantively equivalent and can be used in studies that combine data from English- and French-speaking Canadian SSc patients.</p></div

Factor loadings for the “Positive” and “Negative” latent factors of the CES-D and influence on the overall estimates of fatigue latent factor scores.

a<p>Not corrected for DIF.</p>b<p>^bCorrected for DIF for items 3, 10, and 11.</p><p>CI = Confidence Interval.</p

Sociodemographic and Disease-Related Characteristics.

<p>Due to missing values:</p>a<p>^an = 1005;</p>b<p>^bn = 1003;</p>c<p>^cn = 1004;</p>d<p>^dn = 992;</p>e<p>^en = 247;</p>f<p>^fn = 991; and ^gn = 243.</p

Factor loadings for the FACIT-F in English and French samples and influence on the overall estimates of fatigue latent factor scores.

a<p>Not corrected for DIF, ^bCorrected for DIF for item 1, 4 and 8.</p

PRISMA Flow Diagram of Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review Selection Process for Study.

<p>PRISMA flow diagram of recent meta-analyses and systematic reviews of mindfulness-based therapy on mental health outcomes, including reasons for and number of excluded reviews.</p

Demographic and disease characteristics for the three SSc samples.

<p>Due to missing values: ^aN = 228, ^bN = 869,^cN = 868, ^dN = 822, ^eN = 221, ^fN = 861, ^gN = 225.</p><p>Difference with English sample: *P<0.05; **P<0.001.</p

PRISMA Flow Diagram of Selection of Trial Registrations of Completed Randomized Controlled Trials of Mindfulness-based Therapy.

<p>PRISMA flow diagram of trial registrations of completed randomized controlled trials of mindfulness-based therapy on mental health outcomes, including reasons for and number of excluded trial registrations.</p

Summary of Observed and Expected number of Positive Studies for Key Subgroups with Power Calculation Based on Effect Size d = 0.55^a.

<p>Summary of Observed and Expected number of Positive Studies for Key Subgroups with Power Calculation Based on Effect Size d = 0.55<a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0153220#t002fn002" target="_blank">^a</a>.</p

PRISMA Flow Diagram of Selection of Published Randomized Controlled Trials of Mindfulness-based Therapy.

<p>PRISMA flow diagram of selection of published randomized controlled trials of mindfulness-based therapies on mental health outcomes, including reasons for and number of excluded trials.</p