Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
Published in: Health and Quality of Life Outcomes 1/2017

Open Access 01-12-2017 | Research

The Kessler psychological distress scale: translation and validation of an Arabic version

Authors: Scott D. Easton, Najwa S. Safadi, Yihan Wang, Robert G. Hasson III

Published in: Health and Quality of Life Outcomes | Issue 1/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The Kessler Psychological Distress Scale has been widely used in assessing psychological distress among general and clinical populations from different cultural backgrounds. To our knowledge, however, researchers have not yet validated any translated versions in Arabic. The purpose of this study was to test the reliability and validity of Arabic translations of the ten item (K10) and six item (K6) versions among public sector employees in the Occupied Palestinian Territories.

Methods

As part of a larger research project on life satisfaction, researchers collected data from 234 Palestinian social workers in June and July of 2016. The survey included several mental health measures, including the K10, which were translated from English to Arabic by an experienced language expert. In the current study, we tested reliability by measuring internal consistency using Cronbach’s alpha coefficient. Next, we assessed factor structure using variance-covariance matrix with maximum likelihood estimation. Confirmatory factor analysis was performed to examine three competing models: unidimensional K10 model, unidimensional K6 model and two-factor K6 model. Fit indices and parameter estimates were reported. Last, convergent validity was examined by assessing correlations with Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD-7) and Somatic Symptoms Scale (SSS-8).

Results

The mean scores for the K6 and K10 were, respectively, 12.87 (SD = 4.02) and 21.8 (SD = 6.7), indicative of mild to moderate levels of distress. Scale reliability analysis showed satisfactory results on both K6 and K10 versions (Cronbach’s α = .81 (K6) and .88 (K10)). Among three competing models, the two-factor K6 scale demonstrated the best model fit with high factorial correlations (r = .60, p < .001). Moreover, the K6 has high convergent validity with GAD-7 (r = .66, p < .001) and SSS-8 (r = .61, p < .001).

Conclusion

Results indicated that the translated version of the two-factor K6 scale is a valid and reliable measurement of psychological distress. Our findings suggest that practitioners and researchers can use this instrument in screening and assessing psychological symptoms with Arabic-speaking populations.
Literature
1.
Kessler RC, Andrews G, Colpe LJ, Hiripi E, Mroczek DK, Normand SL, Walters AM, Zaslavsky AM. Short screening scales to monitor population prevalence and trends in non-specific psychological distress. Psychol Med. 2002;32:959–76.CrossRefPubMed
2.
Kessler RC, Barker PR, Colpe LJ, Epstein JF, Gfroerer JC, Hiripi E. Screening for serious mental illness in the general population. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2003;60:184–9.CrossRefPubMed
3.
Bessaha M. Factor structure of the Kessler psychological distress scale (K6) among emerging adults. Res Soc Work Pract. 2015:1–9.
4.
Blanc S, Zamorski M, Ivey G, Edge HM, Hill K. How much distress is too much on deployed operations? Validation of the Kessler psychological distress scale (K10) for application in military operational settings. Mil Psychol. 2014;26:88–100.CrossRef
5.
Hilton MF, Whiteford HA, Sheridan JS, Cleary CM, Chant DC, Wang PS, Kessler RC. The prevalence of psychological distress in employees and associated occupational risk factors. J Occup Environ Med. 2008;50:746–57.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Li C, Ford ES, Zhao G, Balluz LS, Berry JT, Mokdad AH. Undertreatment of mental health problems in adults with diagnosed diabetes and serious psychological distress: the behavioral risk factor surveillance system. Diabetes Care. 2010;33:1061–4.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
7.
Chan SM, Fung TCT. Reliability and validity of K10 and K6 in screening depressive symptoms in Hong Kong adolescents. Vulnerable Children and Youth Studies. 2014;9:75–85.CrossRef
8.
Min JW, Lee SH. Validation of the K6/K10 scales of psychological distress and their optimal cutoff scores for older Koreans. Int J Aging Hum Dev. 2015;80:264–82.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Furukawa TA, Kessler RC, Slade T, Andrews G. 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. 2003;33:357–62.CrossRefPubMed
10.
Andersen L, Grimsrud A, Myer L, Williams D, Stein D, Seedat S. The psychometric properties of the K10 and K6 scales in screening for mood and anxiety disorders in the south African stress and health study. Int J Methods Psychiatr Res. 2011;20:215–23.CrossRefPubMed
11.
Arnaud B, Malet L, Teissedre F, Izaute M, Moustafa F, Geneste J, Schmidt J, Llorca P, Brousse G. Validity study of Kessler’s psychological distress scales conducted among patients admitted to French emergency department for alcohol consumption-related disorders. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2010;34:1235–45.PubMed
12.
Oakley Browne MA, Wells JE, Scott KM, McGee MA. The Kessler psychological distress scale in Te Rau Hinengaro: the New Zealand mental health survey. Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2010;44:314–22.CrossRefPubMed
13.
Mitchell CM, Beals J. The utility of the Kessler screening scale for psychological distress (K6) in two American Indian communities. Psychol Assess. 2011;23:752–61.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
14.
Terrez BEV, Salcedo VV, Estrada CR, Romero JP, Sotres JC. Validation of the Kessler Scale 10 (K-10) in the detection of depression and anxiety in the first level of care. psychometric properties. [Validación de la escala Kessler 10 (K-10) en la detección de depresión y ansiedad en el primer nivel de atención. Propiedades psicométricas]. Salud Mental. 2011;34:323–31.
15.
Fassaert T, De Wit MA, Tuinebreijer WC, Wouters H, Verhoeff AP, Beekman AT, Dekker J. Psychometric properties of an interviewer-administered version of the Kessler psychological distress scale (K10) among Dutch, Moroccan, and Turkish respondents. Int J Methods Psychiatr Res. 2009;18:159–68.CrossRefPubMed
16.
Brooks RT, Beard J, Steel Z. Factor structure and interpretation of the K10. Psychol Assess. 2006;18:62–70.CrossRefPubMed
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
Easton SD, Safadi NA, Hasson RH. “We deal with symptoms rather than causes”: Challenges in Formulating Anti-Poverty Policies in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. Journal of Loss and Trauma. (In press)
23.
Fawcett PD. Translation and language: linguistic theories explained. Manchester, England: St Jerome Publishing; 1997.
24.
Cornelius BL, Groothoff JW, Van der Klink JJ, Brouwer S. The performance of the K10, K6 and GHQ-12 to screen for present state DSM-IV disorders among disability claimants. BMC Public Health. 2013;13:128–35.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
25.
XQ B, You LM, Li Y, Liu K, Zheng J, Yan TB, Chen SX, Zhang LF. Psychometric properties of the Kessler 10 scale in Chinese parents of children with cancer. Cancer Nurs. 2016;40:9–16.
26.
Spitzer R, Kroenke K, Williams JBW, Lowe B. A brief measure for assessing generalized anxiety disorder: the GAD-7. Arch Intern Med. 2006;166:1092–7.CrossRefPubMed
27.
Kessler RC, Green JG, Gruber MJ, Sampson NA, Bromet E, Cuitan M, Furukawa TA, Gureje O, Hinkov H, C-Y H, Lara C, Lee S, Mneimneh Z, Myer L, Oakley-Brown M, Posada-Villa J, Sagar R, Viana MC, Zaslavsky AM. Screening for serious mental illness in the general population with the K6 screening scale: results from the WHO world mental health (WMH) survey initiative. Int J Methods Psychiatr Res. 2010;19:4–22.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
28.
Gierk B, Kohlmann S, Kroenke K, Spangenberg L, Zenger M, Brähler E, Löwe B. The somatic symptom scale–8 (SSS-8): a brief measure of somatic symptom burden. JAMA Intern Med. 2014;174:399–407.CrossRefPubMed
29.
Inc SPSS. Statistical package for the social sciences. Chicago, IL: SPSS Inc.; 2001.
30.
Jöreskog KG, Sörbom D. LISREL 8.7 for windows [computer software]. Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International, Inc.; 2004.
31.
Schafer JL. Multiple imputation: a primer. Statistical Methods in. Medicine. 1999;8(1):3–15.
32.
Byrne BM. Structural equation modeling with Mplus: basic concepts, applications, and programming. New York, NY: Routledge; 2002.
33.
Schmitt T. Current methodological considerations in exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. J Psychoeduc Assess. 2011;29(4):304–21.CrossRef
34.
Bentler PM. EQS 6 structural equations program manual. Encino, CA: Multivariate Software, Inc.; 2006.
35.
LT H, Bentler PM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equ Model. 1999;6:1–55.CrossRef
36.
Browne MW, Cudeck R. Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In Testing structural equation models. Eds ed. Newbury Park, CA: Sage: Bollen KA, long JS; 1993. p. 136–62.
37.
Al-Turkait FA, Ohaeri JU. Exploratory factor analytical study of depressive symptomatology: an Arab experience with a sample comprising college students, using the revised Beck depression inventory. Annals of Saudi Medicine. 2012;32:19–26.CrossRefPubMed
38.
Hinton DE, Lewis-Fernandez R. Idioms of distress among trauma survivors: subtypes and clinical utility. Cult Med Psychiatry. 2010;34:209–18.CrossRefPubMed
39.
Miller K, Wilson S, Chepp V, Padilla JL, editors. Cognitive interviewing methodology. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons; 2014.
Metadata
Title
The Kessler psychological distress scale: translation and validation of an Arabic version
Authors
Scott D. Easton
Najwa S. Safadi
Yihan Wang
Robert G. Hasson III
Publication date
01-12-2017
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes / Issue 1/2017
Electronic ISSN: 1477-7525
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-017-0783-9

Other articles of this Issue 1/2017

Health and Quality of Life Outcomes 1/2017 Go to the issue

Research

Validation of the Italian version of the Laval questionnaire: health-related quality of life in subjects with obesity

Research

Health-related quality of life and influencing factors among migrant children in Shaoxing, China

Review

The effectiveness of integrated care interventions in improving patient quality of life (QoL) for patients with chronic conditions. An overview of the systematic review evidence

Research

Benefits of different intensity of aerobic exercise in modulating body composition among obese young adults: a pilot randomized controlled trial

Research

Evaluation of the impact of once weekly dulaglutide on patient-reported outcomes in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes: comparisons with liraglutide, insulin glargine, and placebo in two randomized studies

Research

International comparison of experience-based health state values at the population level