The work role functioning questionnaire v2.0 showed consistent factor structure across six working samples

F.I. Abma, U. Bültmann, I.B.C. Amick, I. Arends, H.F. Dorland, P.A. Flach, J.J.L. van der Klink, Hardy A. van de Ven, J.B. Bjørner

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

8 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Objective 

The Work Role Functioning Questionnaire v2.0 (WRFQ) is an outcome measure linking a persons' health to the ability to meet work demands in the twenty-first century. We aimed to examine the construct validity of the WRFQ in a heterogeneous set of working samples in the Netherlands with mixed clinical conditions and job types to evaluate the comparability of the scale structure. 

Methods 

Confirmatory factor and multi-group analyses were conducted in six cross-sectional working samples (total N = 2433) to evaluate and compare a five-factor model structure of the WRFQ (work scheduling demands, output demands, physical demands, mental and social demands, and flexibility demands). Model fit indices were calculated based on RMSEA ≤ 0.08 and CFI ≥ 0.95. After fitting the five-factor model, the multidimensional structure of the instrument was evaluated across samples using a second order factor model. 

Results 

The factor structure was robust across samples and a multi-group model had adequate fit (RMSEA = 0.63, CFI = 0.972). In sample specific analyses, minor modifications were necessary in three samples (final RMSEA 0.055-0.080, final CFI between 0.955 and 0.989). Applying the previous first order specifications, a second order factor model had adequate fit in all samples. 

Conclusion 

A five-factor model of the WRFQ showed consistent structural validity across samples. A second order factor model showed adequate fit, but the second order factor loadings varied across samples. Therefore subscale scores are recommended to compare across different clinical and working samples.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)465–474
JournalJournal of Occupational Rehabilitation
Volume28
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2018

Fingerprint

Netherlands
Surveys and Questionnaires
chemotactic factor inactivator

Keywords

  • COMMON MENTAL-DISORDERS
  • CONFIRMATORY FACTOR-ANALYSIS
  • CROSS-CULTURAL ADAPTATION
  • Confirmatory factor analyses
  • HEALTH CONDITIONS
  • LIMITATIONS QUESTIONNAIRE
  • PERFORMANCE
  • RELIABILITY
  • SICKNESS ABSENCE
  • SPANISH VERSION
  • VALIDITY
  • Validity
  • Work role functioning
  • Workers

Cite this

Abma, F. I., Bültmann, U., Amick, I. B. C., Arends, I., Dorland, H. F., Flach, P. A., ... Bjørner, J. B. (2018). The work role functioning questionnaire v2.0 showed consistent factor structure across six working samples. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 28(3), 465–474. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-017-9722-1
Abma, F.I. ; Bültmann, U. ; Amick, I.B.C. ; Arends, I. ; Dorland, H.F. ; Flach, P.A. ; van der Klink, J.J.L. ; van de Ven, Hardy A. ; Bjørner, J.B. / The work role functioning questionnaire v2.0 showed consistent factor structure across six working samples. In: Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation. 2018 ; Vol. 28, No. 3. pp. 465–474.
@article{affadbb63cbd4fed9d627ebf2a642586,
title = "The work role functioning questionnaire v2.0 showed consistent factor structure across six working samples",
abstract = "Objective The Work Role Functioning Questionnaire v2.0 (WRFQ) is an outcome measure linking a persons' health to the ability to meet work demands in the twenty-first century. We aimed to examine the construct validity of the WRFQ in a heterogeneous set of working samples in the Netherlands with mixed clinical conditions and job types to evaluate the comparability of the scale structure. Methods Confirmatory factor and multi-group analyses were conducted in six cross-sectional working samples (total N = 2433) to evaluate and compare a five-factor model structure of the WRFQ (work scheduling demands, output demands, physical demands, mental and social demands, and flexibility demands). Model fit indices were calculated based on RMSEA ≤ 0.08 and CFI ≥ 0.95. After fitting the five-factor model, the multidimensional structure of the instrument was evaluated across samples using a second order factor model. Results The factor structure was robust across samples and a multi-group model had adequate fit (RMSEA = 0.63, CFI = 0.972). In sample specific analyses, minor modifications were necessary in three samples (final RMSEA 0.055-0.080, final CFI between 0.955 and 0.989). Applying the previous first order specifications, a second order factor model had adequate fit in all samples. Conclusion A five-factor model of the WRFQ showed consistent structural validity across samples. A second order factor model showed adequate fit, but the second order factor loadings varied across samples. Therefore subscale scores are recommended to compare across different clinical and working samples.",
keywords = "COMMON MENTAL-DISORDERS, CONFIRMATORY FACTOR-ANALYSIS, CROSS-CULTURAL ADAPTATION, Confirmatory factor analyses, HEALTH CONDITIONS, LIMITATIONS QUESTIONNAIRE, PERFORMANCE, RELIABILITY, SICKNESS ABSENCE, SPANISH VERSION, VALIDITY, Validity, Work role functioning, Workers",
author = "F.I. Abma and U. B{\"u}ltmann and I.B.C. Amick and I. Arends and H.F. Dorland and P.A. Flach and {van der Klink}, J.J.L. and {van de Ven}, {Hardy A.} and J.B. Bj{\o}rner",
year = "2018",
doi = "10.1007/s10926-017-9722-1",
language = "English",
volume = "28",
pages = "465–474",
journal = "Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation",
issn = "1053-0487",
publisher = "Springer New York",
number = "3",

}

Abma, FI, Bültmann, U, Amick, IBC, Arends, I, Dorland, HF, Flach, PA, van der Klink, JJL, van de Ven, HA & Bjørner, JB 2018, 'The work role functioning questionnaire v2.0 showed consistent factor structure across six working samples', Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 465–474. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-017-9722-1

The work role functioning questionnaire v2.0 showed consistent factor structure across six working samples. / Abma, F.I.; Bültmann, U.; Amick, I.B.C.; Arends, I.; Dorland, H.F.; Flach, P.A.; van der Klink, J.J.L.; van de Ven, Hardy A.; Bjørner, J.B.

In: Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, Vol. 28, No. 3, 2018, p. 465–474.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - The work role functioning questionnaire v2.0 showed consistent factor structure across six working samples

AU - Abma, F.I.

AU - Bültmann, U.

AU - Amick, I.B.C.

AU - Arends, I.

AU - Dorland, H.F.

AU - Flach, P.A.

AU - van der Klink, J.J.L.

AU - van de Ven, Hardy A.

AU - Bjørner, J.B.

PY - 2018

Y1 - 2018

N2 - Objective The Work Role Functioning Questionnaire v2.0 (WRFQ) is an outcome measure linking a persons' health to the ability to meet work demands in the twenty-first century. We aimed to examine the construct validity of the WRFQ in a heterogeneous set of working samples in the Netherlands with mixed clinical conditions and job types to evaluate the comparability of the scale structure. Methods Confirmatory factor and multi-group analyses were conducted in six cross-sectional working samples (total N = 2433) to evaluate and compare a five-factor model structure of the WRFQ (work scheduling demands, output demands, physical demands, mental and social demands, and flexibility demands). Model fit indices were calculated based on RMSEA ≤ 0.08 and CFI ≥ 0.95. After fitting the five-factor model, the multidimensional structure of the instrument was evaluated across samples using a second order factor model. Results The factor structure was robust across samples and a multi-group model had adequate fit (RMSEA = 0.63, CFI = 0.972). In sample specific analyses, minor modifications were necessary in three samples (final RMSEA 0.055-0.080, final CFI between 0.955 and 0.989). Applying the previous first order specifications, a second order factor model had adequate fit in all samples. Conclusion A five-factor model of the WRFQ showed consistent structural validity across samples. A second order factor model showed adequate fit, but the second order factor loadings varied across samples. Therefore subscale scores are recommended to compare across different clinical and working samples.

AB - Objective The Work Role Functioning Questionnaire v2.0 (WRFQ) is an outcome measure linking a persons' health to the ability to meet work demands in the twenty-first century. We aimed to examine the construct validity of the WRFQ in a heterogeneous set of working samples in the Netherlands with mixed clinical conditions and job types to evaluate the comparability of the scale structure. Methods Confirmatory factor and multi-group analyses were conducted in six cross-sectional working samples (total N = 2433) to evaluate and compare a five-factor model structure of the WRFQ (work scheduling demands, output demands, physical demands, mental and social demands, and flexibility demands). Model fit indices were calculated based on RMSEA ≤ 0.08 and CFI ≥ 0.95. After fitting the five-factor model, the multidimensional structure of the instrument was evaluated across samples using a second order factor model. Results The factor structure was robust across samples and a multi-group model had adequate fit (RMSEA = 0.63, CFI = 0.972). In sample specific analyses, minor modifications were necessary in three samples (final RMSEA 0.055-0.080, final CFI between 0.955 and 0.989). Applying the previous first order specifications, a second order factor model had adequate fit in all samples. Conclusion A five-factor model of the WRFQ showed consistent structural validity across samples. A second order factor model showed adequate fit, but the second order factor loadings varied across samples. Therefore subscale scores are recommended to compare across different clinical and working samples.

KW - COMMON MENTAL-DISORDERS

KW - CONFIRMATORY FACTOR-ANALYSIS

KW - CROSS-CULTURAL ADAPTATION

KW - Confirmatory factor analyses

KW - HEALTH CONDITIONS

KW - LIMITATIONS QUESTIONNAIRE

KW - PERFORMANCE

KW - RELIABILITY

KW - SICKNESS ABSENCE

KW - SPANISH VERSION

KW - VALIDITY

KW - Validity

KW - Work role functioning

KW - Workers

U2 - 10.1007/s10926-017-9722-1

DO - 10.1007/s10926-017-9722-1

M3 - Article

VL - 28

SP - 465

EP - 474

JO - Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation

JF - Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation

SN - 1053-0487

IS - 3

ER -