Confirmatory factor structure of anxiety and depression: evidence of item variance across childhood
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The distinctiveness of anxiety and depressive symptoms in children has previously been questioned based on their high degree of comorbidity, shared risk factors, and treatment response. Developing children may show an unstable presentation of anxiety and depressive symptoms that would complicate interpretation of studies of comorbidity. The present study examined the measurement stability of anxiety and depressive symptoms across time and sex using a large epidemiologic sample of children. A nationally representative cohort of 1329 children (624 girls and 705 boys) aged four to seven in 1994 were drawn from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth (NLSY). Using eight years of prospective data we examined whether a one or two factor structure of anxiety (five items) and depressive (four items) symptoms would be invariant across time and sex. Despite item variability within each factor across time, confirmatory factor analysis revealed distinct factors for anxiety and depression that were stable across time and sex. Results provide support that covariation between anxiety and depression is not likely the result of measurement overlap. However, items indicating factors of anxiety and depression in the NLSY may not be sufficient to permit developmentally-sensitive measurement of these factors.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.023 | 0.052 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".