Factor structure of the Multnomah Community Ability Scale - longitudinal analysis

Diego G. Bassani, Carolyn S Dewa, Terry Krupa, Tim Aubry, Margaret Gehrs, Paula N. Goering, David L. Streiner

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

7 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Community mental health services benefit from measuring clinical outcomes relevant to a community-based context in contrast to medically modeled outcomes. The Multnomah Community Ability Scale (MCAS) addresses broad dimensions of community functioning and was developed for clinical and evaluation purposes. We assessed the structural consistency and fit of the scale as a measure of community functioning through confirmatory factor analysis using a longitudinal sample of individuals (n = 408) with severe and persistent mental illness receiving services from community mental health programs. None of the previously hypothesised factor solutions achieved a good fit and a high degree of invariance over time was observed. Through exploratory factor analysis, the possibility of alternative solutions was explored. After exclusion of two of the 17 items, four models - including four-, three-, two- and one-factor solutions - were tested for fit and invariance with no improvement. We discuss our findings of poor fit under the assumption that the MCAS should psychometrically behave as a scale. Alternative interpretations for the tool and suggestions for the use of its items as an index that measures aspects of disability are proposed.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)178-189
Number of pages12
JournalPsychiatry Research
Volume167
Issue number1-2
DOIs
StatePublished - May 15 2009
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Aptitude
Community Mental Health Services
Statistical Factor Analysis
Insurance Benefits

Keywords

  • Community functioning
  • Indexes
  • Outcome measures
  • Psychometrics
  • Scales

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Psychiatry and Mental health
  • Biological Psychiatry

Cite this

Bassani, D. G., Dewa, C. S., Krupa, T., Aubry, T., Gehrs, M., Goering, P. N., & Streiner, D. L. (2009). Factor structure of the Multnomah Community Ability Scale - longitudinal analysis. Psychiatry Research, 167(1-2), 178-189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2008.01.005

Factor structure of the Multnomah Community Ability Scale - longitudinal analysis. / Bassani, Diego G.; Dewa, Carolyn S; Krupa, Terry; Aubry, Tim; Gehrs, Margaret; Goering, Paula N.; Streiner, David L.

In: Psychiatry Research, Vol. 167, No. 1-2, 15.05.2009, p. 178-189.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Bassani, DG, Dewa, CS, Krupa, T, Aubry, T, Gehrs, M, Goering, PN & Streiner, DL 2009, 'Factor structure of the Multnomah Community Ability Scale - longitudinal analysis', Psychiatry Research, vol. 167, no. 1-2, pp. 178-189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2008.01.005
Bassani, Diego G. ; Dewa, Carolyn S ; Krupa, Terry ; Aubry, Tim ; Gehrs, Margaret ; Goering, Paula N. ; Streiner, David L. / Factor structure of the Multnomah Community Ability Scale - longitudinal analysis. In: Psychiatry Research. 2009 ; Vol. 167, No. 1-2. pp. 178-189.
@article{f601ad4338f84189ad850d4b7e0ced87,
title = "Factor structure of the Multnomah Community Ability Scale - longitudinal analysis",
abstract = "Community mental health services benefit from measuring clinical outcomes relevant to a community-based context in contrast to medically modeled outcomes. The Multnomah Community Ability Scale (MCAS) addresses broad dimensions of community functioning and was developed for clinical and evaluation purposes. We assessed the structural consistency and fit of the scale as a measure of community functioning through confirmatory factor analysis using a longitudinal sample of individuals (n = 408) with severe and persistent mental illness receiving services from community mental health programs. None of the previously hypothesised factor solutions achieved a good fit and a high degree of invariance over time was observed. Through exploratory factor analysis, the possibility of alternative solutions was explored. After exclusion of two of the 17 items, four models - including four-, three-, two- and one-factor solutions - were tested for fit and invariance with no improvement. We discuss our findings of poor fit under the assumption that the MCAS should psychometrically behave as a scale. Alternative interpretations for the tool and suggestions for the use of its items as an index that measures aspects of disability are proposed.",
keywords = "Community functioning, Indexes, Outcome measures, Psychometrics, Scales",
author = "Bassani, {Diego G.} and Dewa, {Carolyn S} and Terry Krupa and Tim Aubry and Margaret Gehrs and Goering, {Paula N.} and Streiner, {David L.}",
year = "2009",
month = "5",
day = "15",
doi = "10.1016/j.psychres.2008.01.005",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "167",
pages = "178--189",
journal = "Psychiatry Research",
issn = "0165-1781",
publisher = "Elsevier Ireland Ltd",
number = "1-2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Factor structure of the Multnomah Community Ability Scale - longitudinal analysis

AU - Bassani, Diego G.

AU - Dewa, Carolyn S

AU - Krupa, Terry

AU - Aubry, Tim

AU - Gehrs, Margaret

AU - Goering, Paula N.

AU - Streiner, David L.

PY - 2009/5/15

Y1 - 2009/5/15

N2 - Community mental health services benefit from measuring clinical outcomes relevant to a community-based context in contrast to medically modeled outcomes. The Multnomah Community Ability Scale (MCAS) addresses broad dimensions of community functioning and was developed for clinical and evaluation purposes. We assessed the structural consistency and fit of the scale as a measure of community functioning through confirmatory factor analysis using a longitudinal sample of individuals (n = 408) with severe and persistent mental illness receiving services from community mental health programs. None of the previously hypothesised factor solutions achieved a good fit and a high degree of invariance over time was observed. Through exploratory factor analysis, the possibility of alternative solutions was explored. After exclusion of two of the 17 items, four models - including four-, three-, two- and one-factor solutions - were tested for fit and invariance with no improvement. We discuss our findings of poor fit under the assumption that the MCAS should psychometrically behave as a scale. Alternative interpretations for the tool and suggestions for the use of its items as an index that measures aspects of disability are proposed.

AB - Community mental health services benefit from measuring clinical outcomes relevant to a community-based context in contrast to medically modeled outcomes. The Multnomah Community Ability Scale (MCAS) addresses broad dimensions of community functioning and was developed for clinical and evaluation purposes. We assessed the structural consistency and fit of the scale as a measure of community functioning through confirmatory factor analysis using a longitudinal sample of individuals (n = 408) with severe and persistent mental illness receiving services from community mental health programs. None of the previously hypothesised factor solutions achieved a good fit and a high degree of invariance over time was observed. Through exploratory factor analysis, the possibility of alternative solutions was explored. After exclusion of two of the 17 items, four models - including four-, three-, two- and one-factor solutions - were tested for fit and invariance with no improvement. We discuss our findings of poor fit under the assumption that the MCAS should psychometrically behave as a scale. Alternative interpretations for the tool and suggestions for the use of its items as an index that measures aspects of disability are proposed.

KW - Community functioning

KW - Indexes

KW - Outcome measures

KW - Psychometrics

KW - Scales

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=64649107311&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=64649107311&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.psychres.2008.01.005

DO - 10.1016/j.psychres.2008.01.005

M3 - Article

C2 - 19361868

AN - SCOPUS:64649107311

VL - 167

SP - 178

EP - 189

JO - Psychiatry Research

JF - Psychiatry Research

SN - 0165-1781

IS - 1-2

ER -