David P Sheppard1,2, Matthew W Gallagher1, Erin E Morgan3, Angulique Y Outlaw4, Sylvie Naar5, Steven Paul Woods1. 1. Department of Psychology, University of Houston, Houston, USA. 2. Veterans Affairs (VA) Northwest Network (VISN 20) Mental Illness, Research, Education, and Clinical Care (MIRECC), Veterans Affairs Puget Sound Health Care System, Seattle, WA, USA. 3. Department of Psychiatry, University of California, San Diego, USA. 4. Department of Family Medicine & Public Health Sciences, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI, USA. 5. Department of Behavioral Sciences & Social Medicine, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Memory symptoms and objective impairment are common in HIV disease and are associated with disability. A paradoxical issue is that objective episodic memory failures can interfere with accurate recall of memory symptoms. The present study assessed whether responses on a self-report scale of memory symptoms demonstrate measurement invariance in persons with and without objective HIV-associated memory impairment. METHOD: In total, 505 persons with HIV completed the Prospective and Retrospective Memory Questionnaire (PRMQ). Objective memory impairment (n = 141) was determined using a 1-SD cutoff on clinical tests of episodic memory. PRMQ measurement invariance was assessed by confirmatory factor analyses examining a one-factor model with increasing cross-group equality constraints imposed on factor loadings and item thresholds (i.e., configural, weak, and strong invariance). RESULTS: Configural model fit indicated that identical items measured a one-factor model for both groups. Comparison to the weak model indicated that factor loadings were equivalent across groups. However, there was evidence of partial strong invariance, with two PRMQ item thresholds differing across memory impairment groups. Post hoc analyses using a 1.5-SD memory impairment cutoff (n = 77) revealed both partial weak and partial strong invariance, such that PRMQ item loadings differed across memory groups for three items. CONCLUSIONS: The PRMQ demonstrated a robust factor structure among persons with and without objective HIV-associated memory impairment. However, on select PRMQ items, individuals with memory impairment reported observed scores that were relatively higher than their latent score, while items were more strongly associated with the memory factor in a group with greater memory impairment.
OBJECTIVE: Memory symptoms and objective impairment are common in HIV disease and are associated with disability. A paradoxical issue is that objective episodic memory failures can interfere with accurate recall of memory symptoms. The present study assessed whether responses on a self-report scale of memory symptoms demonstrate measurement invariance in persons with and without objective HIV-associated memory impairment. METHOD: In total, 505 persons with HIV completed the Prospective and Retrospective Memory Questionnaire (PRMQ). Objective memory impairment (n = 141) was determined using a 1-SD cutoff on clinical tests of episodic memory. PRMQ measurement invariance was assessed by confirmatory factor analyses examining a one-factor model with increasing cross-group equality constraints imposed on factor loadings and item thresholds (i.e., configural, weak, and strong invariance). RESULTS: Configural model fit indicated that identical items measured a one-factor model for both groups. Comparison to the weak model indicated that factor loadings were equivalent across groups. However, there was evidence of partial strong invariance, with two PRMQ item thresholds differing across memory impairment groups. Post hoc analyses using a 1.5-SD memory impairment cutoff (n = 77) revealed both partial weak and partial strong invariance, such that PRMQ item loadings differed across memory groups for three items. CONCLUSIONS: The PRMQ demonstrated a robust factor structure among persons with and without objective HIV-associated memory impairment. However, on select PRMQ items, individuals with memory impairment reported observed scores that were relatively higher than their latent score, while items were more strongly associated with the memory factor in a group with greater memory impairment.
Authors: A Antinori; G Arendt; J T Becker; B J Brew; D A Byrd; M Cherner; D B Clifford; P Cinque; L G Epstein; K Goodkin; M Gisslen; I Grant; R K Heaton; J Joseph; K Marder; C M Marra; J C McArthur; M Nunn; R W Price; L Pulliam; K R Robertson; N Sacktor; V Valcour; V E Wojna Journal: Neurology Date: 2007-10-03 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Lisa C Obermeit; Erin E Morgan; Kaitlin B Casaletto; Igor Grant; Steven Paul Woods Journal: Clin Neuropsychol Date: 2015-03-17 Impact factor: 3.535
Authors: Steven Paul Woods; J Cobb Scott; Matthew S Dawson; Erin E Morgan; Catherine L Carey; Robert K Heaton; Igor Grant Journal: Arch Clin Neuropsychol Date: 2005-09-29 Impact factor: 2.813
Authors: Sandra Weintraub; Sureyya S Dikmen; Robert K Heaton; David S Tulsky; Philip D Zelazo; Patricia J Bauer; Noelle E Carlozzi; Jerry Slotkin; David Blitz; Kathleen Wallner-Allen; Nathan A Fox; Jennifer L Beaumont; Dan Mungas; Cindy J Nowinski; Jennifer Richler; Joanne A Deocampo; Jacob E Anderson; Jennifer J Manly; Beth Borosh; Richard Havlik; Kevin Conway; Emmeline Edwards; Lisa Freund; Jonathan W King; Claudia Moy; Ellen Witt; Richard C Gershon Journal: Neurology Date: 2013-03-12 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Kevin R Robertson; Marlene Smurzynski; Thomas D Parsons; Kunling Wu; Ronald J Bosch; Julia Wu; Justin C McArthur; Ann C Collier; Scott R Evans; Ron J Ellis Journal: AIDS Date: 2007-09-12 Impact factor: 4.177
Authors: Kelli L Sullivan; Matthew W Gallagher; Romola S Bucks; Michael Weinborn; Steven Paul Woods Journal: J Clin Exp Neuropsychol Date: 2022-08-05 Impact factor: 2.283