# The Dutch clinical impairment assessment: factor analysis and psychometric properties in a clinical eating disorder sample

## TL;DR

This study evaluates the Dutch version of the Clinical Impairment Assessment (CIA) for eating disorders, confirming its reliability and validity in measuring impairment.

## Contribution

The study validates a bifactor model for the Dutch CIA, showing a strong general factor and three specific impairment domains.

## Key findings

- A bifactor model with one general and three specific factors best fits the Dutch CIA data.
- The CIA demonstrated good internal consistency (Cronbach’s α = 0.91) and convergent validity (r = 0.58).
- The instrument showed strong sensitivity to change in eating disorder symptoms (t = 13.76, p < 0.001).

## Abstract

The present study reports on the psychometric properties of the Dutch translation of the clinical impairment assessment (CIA) questionnaire in female patients with eating disorders. The aim of this study was to determine the factor structure of the CIA as there are conflicting studies supporting a three-factor, bifactor, and single-factor model with a general factor and three specific factors.

The CIA was translated and administered to 321 female patients with various eating disorders receiving treatment in a specialized eating disorder center. Its factor structure, internal consistency, convergent validity, and sensitivity to change were investigated.

Confirmatory factor analyses showed the best fit was a bifactor model with one strong general factor and three less strong specific factors for personal, social, and cognitive impairment. Furthermore, good internal consistency (Cronbach’s α = 0.91), good convergent validity between CIA global score and eating disorder examination questionnaire global score (r = 0.58; p < 0.001) and good sensitivity to change (t (115) = 13.76, p < 0.001) were found.

The Dutch CIA is a reliable and valid instrument to measure impairment secondary to eating disorder symptoms, but interpretations made from subscales scores should be used with caution.

Level III, validation study.