Minimal impact of response shift for SF-12 mental and physical health status in homeless and vulnerably housed individuals: an item-level multi-group analysis
The purpose of this study was to examine whether homeless or vulnerably housed individuals experienced response shift over a 12-month time period in their self-reported physical and mental health status.
Data were obtained from the Health and Housing in Transition study, a longitudinal multi-site cohort study in Canada (N = 1190 at baseline). Multi-group confirmatory factor analysis (MG-CFA) and methods for response shift detection at the item level, based on the approach by Oort, were used to test for reconceptualization, reprioritization, and recalibration response shift on the SF-12 in four groups of individuals who were homeless (n = 170), housed (n = 437), or who reported a change in their housing status [from homeless to housed (n = 285) or housed to homeless (n = 73)] over a 12-month time period. Mean and variance adjusted weighted-least squares estimation was used to accommodate the ordinal and binary distributions of the SF-12 items.
Using MG-CFA, a strict invariance model showed that the measurement model was equivalent for the four groups at baseline. Although we found small but statistically significant response shift for several measurement model parameters, the impact on the predicted average mental and physical health scores within each of the groups was small.
Response shift does not appear to be a significant concern when using the SF-12 to obtain change scores over a 12-month period in this population.
KeywordsHomeless persons Vulnerable populations Response shift Health Mental health SF-12
This project was supported by an Operating Grant (MOP-86765) from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. Dr. Gadermann also acknowledges support from the Michael Smith Foundation for Health Research and Canadian Institutes of Health Research. We would like to acknowledge the following individuals from our community partner organizations: Laura Cowan, Liz Evans, Sarah Evans, Stephanie Gee, Clare Haskel, Erika Khandor, and Wendy Muckle. The authors also thank the study coordinators and interviewers in each of the three cities as well as the shelter, drop-in, municipal and provincial staff for their assistance with participant recruitment and follow-up.
This project was supported by an Operating Grant (MOP-86765) from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. Dr. Gadermann also acknowledges support from the Michael Smith Foundation for Health Research and Canadian Institutes of Health Research.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
All authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.
All procedures performed in this study were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- 1.Hwang, S. W., Aubry, T., Palepu, A., Farrell, S., Nisenbaum, R., Hubley, A. M., et al. (2011). The health and housing in transition study: A longitudinal study of the health of homeless and vulnerably housed adults in three Canadian cities. International Journal of Public Health, 56, 609–623.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 2.Laird, G. (2007). Shelter: Homelessness in a growth economy: Canada’s 21st century paradox. A report for the Sheldon Chumir Foundation for Ethics in Leadership, Calgary.Google Scholar
- 3.Research Alliance for Canadian Homelessness, Housing, and Health (REACH3) (2010). Housing vulnerability and health: Canada’s hidden emergency. http://www.pshp.ca/documents/resources/2010-REACH-Housing-Vulnerability.pdf. Accessed 16 March 2016.
- 14.Patterson, M., Moniruzzaman, A., Palepu, A., Zabkiewicz, D., Frankish, C. J., Krausz, M., et al. (2013). Housing first improves subjective quality of life among homeless adults with mental illness: 12-month findings from a randomized controlled trial in Vancouver, British Columbia. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 48, 1245–1259.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 17.Ware, J. E., Kosinski, M., & Keller, S. D. (1994). SF-36 physical and mental health summary scales: A user’s manual. Boston, MA: The Health Institute, New England Medical Center.Google Scholar
- 23.Byrne, B. M. (2012). Structural equation modeling with Mplus: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. New York: Routledge Academic.Google Scholar
- 26.Muthén, B., & Muthén, L. (2013). MPlus (version 7). Los Angeles, CA: Statmodel.Google Scholar
- 28.Finney, S. J., & DiStefano, C. (2006). Non-normal and categorical data in structural equation modeling. In G. R. Hancock & R. O. Mueller (Eds.), Structural equation modeling: A second course (pp. 269–314). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.Google Scholar
- 30.Yu, C. Y. (2002). Evaluating cutoff criteria of model fit indices for latent variable models with binary and continuous outcomes. Dissertation Abstracts International, 63(10), 3527B.Google Scholar
- 31.Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing MI. Structural Equation Modeling, 9, 235–255.Google Scholar
- 33.Hubley, A. M., Russell, L. B., Palepu, A., & Hwang, S. W. (2014). Subjective quality of life among individuals who are homeless: A review of current knowledge. Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, 115, 509–524.CrossRefGoogle Scholar