Do they actually work across borders? Evaluation of two measures of psychological distress as screening instruments in a non Anglo-Saxon country - PubMed (original) (raw)

Do they actually work across borders? Evaluation of two measures of psychological distress as screening instruments in a non Anglo-Saxon country

G Carrà et al. Eur Psychiatry. 2011 Mar.

Abstract

Screening scales can be useful in searching for common mental disorders in primary care and in tracking relevant prevalence and correlates in community surveys. However, it is important to document their validity, before using them. We developed Italian versions of the widely-used K10 and K6 screening scales following the WHO forward-translation and back-translation protocol. To evaluate their effectiveness as screens for DSM-IV 12-month mood or anxiety disorders and "serious mental illness" (SMI), the scales were validated in a two-stage clinical reappraisal survey. In the first-phase, the scales were administered to 605 people. In the second-phase, a sub-sample of 147 first-phase respondents over-sampling screened positives was administered the 12-month version of the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis I Disorders as a clinical gold standard. Performance of the scales in screening for chosen disorders was assessed by calculating area under the receiver operating characteristic curve and stratum-specific likelihood ratios. Both the K10 and K6 performed well in detecting DSM-IV mood disorders, anxiety disorders, and serious mental illness (SMI), with areas under the curve (AUCs) (95% CIs) between 0.82 (0.75-0.89) and 0.91 (0.85-0.96). The Italian versions of the K6 and K10 scales have good psychometric properties, making them attractive inexpensive screens for mood disorders, anxiety disorders, and SMI.

PubMed Disclaimer

Cited by

Effects of physical fitness on mental health of Chinese college students: across-sectional study.
Ma S, Yang Y, Soh KG, Tan H. Ma S, et al. BMC Public Health. 2024 Mar 6;24(1):727. doi: 10.1186/s12889-024-18097-6. BMC Public Health. 2024. PMID: 38448880 Free PMC article.
General population normative data from seven European countries for the K10 and K6 scales for psychological distress.
Lehmann J, Pilz MJ, Holzner B, Kemmler G, Giesinger JM. Lehmann J, et al. Sci Rep. 2023 Oct 26;13(1):18389. doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-45124-0. Sci Rep. 2023. PMID: 37884547 Free PMC article.
Functional Movement Disorders during COVID-19: Psychological Distress, Affective Temperament and Emotional Dysregulation.
Janiri D, Petracca M, Moccia L, Solito M, Lo Monaco MR, Cerbarano ML, Piano C, Imbimbo I, Di Nicola M, Simonetti A, Sani G, Bentivoglio AR. Janiri D, et al. J Pers Med. 2023 Jan 19;13(2):175. doi: 10.3390/jpm13020175. J Pers Med. 2023. PMID: 36836408 Free PMC article.
A Serial Mediation Model of Insecure Attachment and Psychological Distress: The Role of Dispositional Shame and Shame-Coping Styles.
Remondi C, Casu G, Pozzi C, Greco F, Gremigni P, Brugnera A. Remondi C, et al. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2023 Feb 11;20(4):3193. doi: 10.3390/ijerph20043193. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2023. PMID: 36833888 Free PMC article.

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources

Full Text Sources
- ClinicalKey
- Elsevier Science
Medical
- MedlinePlus Health Information
Research Materials
- NCI CPTC Antibody Characterization Program

Do they actually work across borders? Evaluation of two measures of psychological distress as screening instruments in a non Anglo-Saxon country - PubMed (original) (raw)