Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Table 1.

The nine selected questionnaire items.

A short name (in bold) has been assigned to each item. Response options have been rearranged in the order from most to least favorable outcome

More »

Table 1 Expand

Fig 1.

Item response percentages.

NA indicates missing responses. Refer to Table 1 for item response descriptions of the digits for each item.

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Table 2.

Summary statistics across demographics.

More »

Table 2 Expand

Table 3.

Loevinger’s H coefficients and automated item selection procedure results.

H coefficient standard errors are shown in parentheses. Scalable items are denoted by 1 at a given threshold, while 0 indicates the item was unscalable.

More »

Table 3 Expand

Table 4.

Factor loadings (F1 and F2), Communalities (h2), Uniquenesses (u2), and Complexity (com) from EFA with Oblimin Rotation.

Loadings < 0.20 are omitted for clarity.

More »

Table 4 Expand

Table 5.

Model fit statistics for IRT models.

More »

Table 5 Expand

Table 6.

Bifactor GRM item parameters (intercept parameterization) and general–axis thresholds.

Values are estimates with SE in parentheses. ajg = general factor slope; ajs1 = Physical Functioning specific slope; ajs2 = Well-being/Mental Health specific slope. General–axis thresholds are computed with specific factors fixed at 0.

More »

Table 6 Expand

Fig 2.

Expected item scores vs. frailty score () by age group, sex and education.

The expected item score reflects a weighted average of possible responses based on their estimated probabilities.

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Table 7.

ESSD for each item across grouping variables.

More »

Table 7 Expand

Table 8.

Estimated latent means and variances (±95% CI) for all groups.

More »

Table 8 Expand

Fig 3.

Kaplan–Meier survival curves stratified by quartile.

Quartiles Q1–Q4 correspond to increasing (worse recovery); shaded bands are 95% CIs and vertical lines are events (death).

More »

Fig 3 Expand

Table 9.

Cox regression modeling hazard of death utilizing frailty (θ) scores from unidimensional and bifactor (general-factor θ scores) IRT models are shown in their respective columns.

Age and θ scores were centered before fitting the Cox models for easier main effect interpretation.

More »

Table 9 Expand