The performance of the K6 and K10 screening scales for psychological distress in the Australian National Survey of Mental Health and Well-Being

Abstract

Background. Two new screening scales for psychological distress, the K6 and K10, have been developed but their relative efficiency has not been evaluated in comparison with existing scales.Method. The Australian National Survey of Mental Health and Well-Being, a nationally representative household survey, administered the WHO Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI) to assess 30-day DSM-IV disorders. The K6 and K10 were also administered along with the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12), the current de facto standard of mental health screening. Performance of the three screening scales in detecting CIDI/DSM-IV mood and anxiety disorders was assessed by calculating the areas under receiver operating characteristic curves (AUCs). Stratum-Specific Likelihood Ratios (SSLRs) were computed to help produce individual-level predicted probabilities of being a case from screening scale scores in other samples.Results. The K10 was marginally better than the K6 in screening for CIDI/DSM-IV mood and anxiety disorders (K10 AUC: 0·90, 95%CI: 0·89–0·91 versus K6 AUC: 0·89, 95%CI: 0·88–0·90), while both were significantly better than the GHQ-12 (AUC: 0·80, 95%CI: 0·78–0·82). The SSLRs of the K10 and K6 were more informative in ruling in or out the target disorders than those of the GHQ-12 at both ends of the population spectrum. The K6 was more robust than the K10 to subsample variation.Conclusions. While the K10 might outperform the K6 in screening for severe disorders, the K6 is preferred in screening for any DSM-IV mood or anxiety disorder because of its brevity and consistency across subsamples. Precision of individual-level prediction is greatly improved by using polychotomous rather than dichotomous classification.

National estimates of Australian gambling prevalence: f indings from a dual‐frame omnibus survey

“…Scores were classified into low (scores of 6–11), moderate (scores of 12–19) or high (scores of 20–30) psychological distress 26. The K6 is effective at screening for serious mental disorders 27, 28, 29 and had excellent reliability in the current study (α = 0.81). Finally, the Short Form general health status question (SF11 30), which is an accurate predictor of future health care use, mortality and morbidity 30, was employed as a general indicator of physical and mental health.…”

Bullying Experiences Among Children and Youth with Autism Spectrum Disorders

“…The K6 is a core measure in the annual US National Health Bullying 9 Interview Survey, the US National Household Survey of Drug Abuse, and the Canadian National Health Interview Survey. The K6 has high internal consistency (alpha coefficient = .89) and construct validity when compared to other mental health screening tools (Furukawa, Kessler, Slade, & Andrews, 2003;Kessler et al, 2002), and shows good agreement with widely used epidemiological diagnostic interviews (Kessler & Ustun, 2004;Wittchen, 1994). Cronbach's alpha in the current study was = .86.…”

Psychological Distress After the Great East Japan Earthquake and Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant Accident: Results of a Mental Health and Lifestyle Survey Through the Fukushima Health Management Survey in Fy2011 and Fy2012

“…Each question was rated on a 5 -point Likert scale from zero (none of the time) to four (all of the time), with higher scores signifying worse mental health status (range : 0 -24). The Japanese version of the K6 has been validated 12,13) .…”