Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Predictive gender and education bias in Kessler's psychological distress Scale (k10)

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Kessler's Psychological Distress Scale (K10) is a ten-item measure of psychological distress that has been used in recent epidemiological research and as a screen for mental disorders. Moderate relationships have been reported between the K10 and measures of related constructs, such as diagnoses of mental disorders and associated disability. However, it is unclear whether the validity of the K10 is consistent across important demographic, cultural, and socio-economic groups such as gender and educational history or whether there is evidence of predictive bias or inconsistency across these groups.

Methods

Differential validity or predictive bias in the relationship between K10 scores and disability days, SF12 Mental Component Summary (MCS) scores, and 1-month Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI) diagnoses of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition (DSM-IV) Anxiety and Depressive disorders due to gender and completing secondary school were examined using hierarchical linear and logistic regression analyses in the Australian National Survey of Mental Health and Wellbeing data set.

Results

Very small slope and/or intercept biases in the relationship between the K10 and disability days, the SF12 MCS, and 1-month CIDI diagnoses of anxiety and depression were found [effect sizes, the ratio of variance explained to unexplained variance (Cohen's f2), varied from 0.0001 to 0.004].

Conclusion

Gender and educational predictive biases in the relationship between the K10 and disability days, SF12 MCS, and 1-month diagnoses were found to be very small and are unlikely to have any practical impact. This analysis adds to evidence supporting the use of the K10 in epidemiological research.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, National Council on Measurement in Education (1999) Standards for educational and psychological testing. American Educational Research Association, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  2. Andrews G, Peters L (1998) The psychometric properties of the Composite International Diagnostic Interview. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol 33:80–88

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Andrews G, Slade T (2001) Interpreting scores on the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10). Aust N Z J Public Health 25(6):494–497

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Australian Bureau of Statistics (1998) Information paper: mental health and wellbeing of adults, Australia. Confidentialised unit record file (4329.0). Australian Bureau of Statistics, Canberra

    Google Scholar 

  5. Australian Bureau of Statistics (1999) National Survey of Mental Health and Wellbeing of Adults: Users' Guide. Catalogue number 4327.0. Australian Bureau of Statistics, Canberra, Australia

    Google Scholar 

  6. Australian Bureau of Statistics (2003) Use of the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale in ABS Health Surveys. Information Paper. Cataloge 4817.0.55.001. Australian Bureau of Statistics, Canberra

    Google Scholar 

  7. Cleary TA, Humphreys LG, Kendrick SA, Wesman A (1975) Educational uses of tests with disadvantaged students. Am Psychol 30:15–41

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Cohen J, Cohen P, West SG, Aiken LS (2003) Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences, 3rd edn. Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  9. Furukawa TA, Kessler RC, Slade T, Andrews G (2003) The performance of the K6 and K10 screening scales for psychological distress in the Australian National Survey of Mental Health and Well-Being. Psychol Med 33:357–362

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Guilford JP (1954) Psychometric Methods, 2nd edn. McGraw-Hill, NY

    Google Scholar 

  11. Hanley JA, McNeil BJ (1983) A method of comparing the areas under receiver operating characteristic curves derived from the same cases. Radiology 148:839–843

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Henderson S, Andrews G, Hall W (2000). Australia's mental health: an overview of the general population survey. Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 34: 197–205

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Folstein MF, Folstein SE, McHugh PR, (1975) “Mini-mental state”. A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. J Psychiatr Res 12(3):189–198

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Kessler RC, Andrews G, Colpe LJ, Hiripi E, Mroczek DK, Normand, S-LT, Walters EE, Zaslavsky AM (2002) Short screening scales to monitor population prevalences and trends in non-specific psychological distress. Psychol Med 32:959–976

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Kessler RC, Barker PR, Colpe LJ, Epstein JF, Gfroerer JC, Hiripi E, Howes MJ, Normand S-LT, Manderscheid RW, Walters EE, Zaslavsky AM (2003) Screening for serious mental illness in the general population. Arch Gen Psychiatry 60(2):184–189

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. InstitutionalAuthorNameSPSS Inc (2001) Statistical Package for the Social Sciences, version 11.01 SPSS Inc Chicago, IL

    Google Scholar 

  17. von Korff M, Ustun B, Ormel J, Kaplan I, Simon GE (1996) Self-report disability in an international primary care study of psychological illness. J Clin Epidemiol 49:297–303

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Ware JE, Kosinski M, Keller SD (1996) A 12-item Short Form health survey. Med Care 34:220–233

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Wittchen H-U, Zhao S, Abelson JM, Kessler RC (1996) Reliability and procedural validity of UM-CIDI DSM-III-R phobic disorders. Psychol Med 26:1169–1177

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. World Health Organization (1997) Composite International Diagnostic Interview. World Health Organization, Division of Mental Health, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The design, development, and execution of the Australian National Survey of Mental Health and Wellbeing was funded by the Australian Commonwealth Department of Health and Family Services. The development of the survey instrument was carried out by Prof. Gavin Andrews, Dr. Lorna Peters, Dr. Tim Slade and others at the WHO Collaborating Centre in Mental Health at St. Vincent's Hospital, Sydney. The design, development, and conduct of the survey was overseen by Profs. Scott Henderson, Gavin Andrews, Wayne Hall, Helen Herrman, Assen Jablensky, and Bob Kosky. Fieldwork and compilation of the data were conducted by the Australian Bureau of Statistics.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Psychology Dept., Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW, 2109, Australia

    Andrew J. Baillie

Authors
  1. Andrew J. Baillie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andrew J. Baillie.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Baillie, A.J. Predictive gender and education bias in Kessler's psychological distress Scale (k10). Soc Psychiat Epidemiol 40, 743–748 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00127-005-0935-9

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00127-005-0935-9

Key words

Search

Navigation