The Minnesota living with heart failure questionnaire: comparison of different factor structures

Table 2 Results of fit indices of confirmatory factor analysis of the different MLHFQ structures (N = 2565)

Models (first author)	No. of factors	χ² (df)	RMSEA (90 % CI)	CFI	TLI	Factor loading (Range)	AIC
2-factor models
Rector	2	1002.34 (60)	0.083 (0.079 − 0.088)	0.970	0.961	0.61 − 0.88	1064.34
Heo	2	1100.03 (85)	0.080 (0.076 – 0.084)	0.966	0.958	0.50 – 0.87	1170.03
3-factor models
Ho	3	3011.42 (145)	0.103 (0.100 − 0.106)	0.909	0.892	0.35 − 0.86	3101.42
Moon	3	3711.48 (182)	0.102 (0.099 − 0.105)	0.903	0.888	0.34 − 0.86	3809.48
Lambrinou	3	2351.97 (144)	0.091 (0.087 − 0.094)	0.929	0.916	0.32 − 0.89	2483.97
Garin	3	1414.26 (112)	0.079 (0.075 − 0.083)	0.952	0.942	0.43 − 0.89	1496.26
Munyombwe	3	2687.35 (163)	0.091 (0.088 − 0.094)	0.927	0.914	0.35 − 0.87	2781.35

χ ² Chi-square, df degrees of freedom, RMSEA root mean square error of approximation, CI Confidence interval, CFI comparative fit index, TLI Tucker-Lewis fit index, AIC Akaike information criterion