2002
DOI: 10.1046/j.1440-1614.2002.01028.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Review of the Validity of the General Health Questionnaire in Adolescent Populations

Abstract: Psychiatrists and other mental health professionals need to be aware of the above limitations when using the GHQ as a screening instrument with adolescents. Further studies are required to: (i) determine the minimum age at which it can be employed, (ii) compare the use of adult versus adolescent criterion interviews, (iii) assemble relevant normative data, and (iv) establish the validity of translated versions.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
39
0

Year Published

2003
2003
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 54 publications
(40 citation statements)
references
References 46 publications
1
39
0
Order By: Relevance
“…8,12 Although we did not find any study that directly used the CHQ-12 to test distress level in adolescent popula-tion, the CHQ (both the English and Chinese versions) has demonstrated high validity in assessing psychological distress with young and older adolescents in the UK and Hong Kong. 33 In previous studies, 8,12 a CHQ-12 score of 5 defined the cut-off line for high psychological distress. Therefore, in the current study, any individual with a CHQ-12 greater than or equal to 5 was classified in the high psychological distress group, while those with a score of less than 5 formed the low psychological distress group.…”
Section: Instrumentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…8,12 Although we did not find any study that directly used the CHQ-12 to test distress level in adolescent popula-tion, the CHQ (both the English and Chinese versions) has demonstrated high validity in assessing psychological distress with young and older adolescents in the UK and Hong Kong. 33 In previous studies, 8,12 a CHQ-12 score of 5 defined the cut-off line for high psychological distress. Therefore, in the current study, any individual with a CHQ-12 greater than or equal to 5 was classified in the high psychological distress group, while those with a score of less than 5 formed the low psychological distress group.…”
Section: Instrumentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is designed as a measure of current mental health, but is not a tool for specific diagnosis (Montazeri et al, 2003). While initially designed for adults, a review identified 82 studies in which it has been used with adolescents (Tait et al, 2002). The standardised GHQ-12 was originally divided into three main factors: anxiety; social dysfunction; and loss of confidence (Graetz, 1991).…”
Section: ) Quantitative Research Toolsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The GHQ is a validated screener for psychological distress in general population samples of adults (Goldberg et al 1997). Relatively few GHQ validation studies have been conducted with adolescents (Tait et al 2002), but the measure has been shown to have adequate validity with an adolescent sample of 17 year olds using a threshold of 3 for psychological distress (Banks 1983). Within this study, participants were asked to report on their health "over the last few weeks" and respond to each of the 12 items that form the GHQ on a 4-point scale of either (a) better, same, less, or much less than usual; or (b) not at all, no more than usual, somewhat more than usual, or much more than usual.…”
Section: Dependent Variablesmentioning
confidence: 99%