Cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric properties of the Kessler Distress Scale (K10): an application of the rating scale model

Abstract

Background The Kessler Distress Scale (K10) is a self-report scale for the assessment of non-specific psychological distress in the general and clinical population. Because of its ease of application and good psychometric properties, the K10 has been adapted to several cultures. The present study seeks to adapt the K10 to Brazilian Portuguese and estimate its validity evidence and reliability. Methods A total of 1914 individuals from the general population participated in the study (age = 34.88, SD = 13.61, 77.7% female). The adjustment indices were compared among three different measurement models proposed for the K10 through confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). The items’ properties were analyzed by Andrich’s Rating Scale Model (RSM). Furthermore, evidence based on relations to other variables (depression, stress, anxiety, positive and negative affects, and satisfaction with life) was estimated. Results CFA indicated the adequacy of the bifactor model (CFI= 0.985; TLI= 0.973; SMR= 0.019; RMSEA= 0.050), composed of two specific factors (depression and anxiety) and one general factor (psychological distress), corresponding to the theoretical hypothesis. Additionally, it was observed multiple-group invariance by gender and age range. The RSM provided an understanding of the organization of the continuum represented by the psychological distress construct (items difficulty), which varied from −0.89 to 1.00; good adjustment indexes; infit between 0.67 and 1.32; outfit between 0.68 and 1.34; and desirable reliability, α= 0.87. Lastly, theoretically coherent associations with the external variables were observed. Conclusions It is concluded that the Brazilian version of the K10 is a suitable measure of psychological distress for the Brazilian population.

Validating repurposed GAD‐7 anchored in COVID‐19 pandemic experiences: A factor‐ and person‐centered approach

“…A total score is obtained by summing the item scores, with higher scores demonstrating greater levels of psychological distress. Previous studies have provided support for K‐10 as a reliable and valid assessment tool (e.g., Peixoto et al, 2021; Ren et al, 2021). The scale obtained an internal consistency of 0.944 of the current sample.…”

The Hidden Toll of Psychological Distress in Australian Adults and Its Impact on Health-Related Quality of Life Measured as Health State Utilities

“…The K10 is a self-reported measure that briefly assesses the frequency of non-specific PD during the last 30 days [ 62 ]. It is equally suitable for both general and clinical populations [ 63 ]. In an Australian context, its mental disorder detection efficiency has been tested and compared to other instruments including the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12).…”

Repurposing the K-10: The Factor Structure and Latent Profile of COVID-19 Pandemic-Anchored Psychological Distress Symptoms Among Filipino Teachers

“…The assignment of these two items from the anxiety factor to the depression factor contends that "fatigue" and "lack of energy" are both characteristics of depression rather than features of tension (Lace et al, 2019). Model 3 has been validated in a sample of the Brazilian population (Peixoto et al, 2021). Bu et al (2017) proposed model 4, a two-factor model, which shifted one item "tired out for no reason" from model 3's depression factor to the anxiety factor.…”

“…The assignment of these two items from the anxiety factor to the depression factor contends that “fatigue” and “lack of energy” are both characteristics of depression rather than features of tension (Lace et al, 2019). Model 3 has been validated in a sample of the Brazilian population (Peixoto et al, 2021).…”