The performance of the K6 and K10 screening scales for psychological distress in the Australian National Survey of Mental Health and Well-Being

By T. Furukawa, Ronald C. Kessler, T. Slade, G. Andrews. Psychological Medicine, 2003

1,509 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Pharmacology, Psychiatry and Mental health, Social Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/58c356984f92f05225a56d918847a0a5b59ea609

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Pharmacology

In Psychiatry and Mental health

In Social Psychology

Citations in the corpus

Moving to Opportunity and Tranquility: Neighborhood Effects on Adult Economic Self-Sufficiency and Health From a Randomized Housing Voucher Experiment (2004, methodology): “Additional psychometric analysis of the scale has been done by Furukawa et al. (2003). This scale score can range from 0 to 24, which we normalize to a z-score by subtracting the mean of 5.”
Screening performance of K6/K10 and other screening instruments for mood and anxiety disorders in Japan (2011, methodology): “The total score (ranging from 0–24 for K6 and 0–40 for K10) has been used as an indicator of severe mental disorders(18) or mood and anxiety disorders.(17) High scores indicate more severe mental disorders.”
CBT for depression: a pilot RCT comparing mobile phone vs. computer (2013, background): “The K-10 has good psychometric properties and can discriminate between cases and non-cases of DSM-IV affective disorders [27].”
Community Resilience: Models, Metaphors and Measures (2009, background): “, 1992) of the K-6 (Furukawa et al., 2003) to a representative sample of a community.”
The performance of the Japanese version of the K6 and K10 in the World Mental Health Survey Japan (2008, methodology): “SSLRs of the K6 and K10 in Australia (Furukawa et al., 2003)”
Short screening scales to monitor population prevalences and trends in non-specific psychological distress (2002, background): “Calibration rules based on these data that take into consideration the impact of population prevalence on conditional probabilities of clinical outcomes (Furukawa et al. 2002) will be posted on the website mentioned above as soon as the WMH data are analysed.”
Reliability and validity of K10 and K6 in screening depressive symptoms in Hong Kong adolescents (2014, result): “The AUC of both measures was 0.90, which is comparable to those reported in previous studies (e.g., Furukawa et al., 2003; Kessler et al., 2002).”
Validity Study of the K6 Scale as a Measure of Moderate Mental Distress based on Mental Health Treatment Need and Utilization (2012, background): “Its brevity, accuracy, and ability to discriminate DSM-IV cases from non-cases make the K6 scale an ideal screening instrument for serious mental illness in population-based health surveys (Furukawa et al., 2003; Kessler et al., 2003; Veldhuizen et al., 2007).”
The Netherlands Study of Depression and Anxiety (NESDA): rationale, objectives and methods (2008, methodology): “, 2003) with proven screening qualities for affective disorders (Furukawa et al., 2003; Kessler et al., 2003).”
Does Social Support Buffer the Stress of Discrimination and Reduce Psychological Distress Among Asian Americans? (2014, methodology): “mental health (Furukawa et al. 2003), and has been used to assess the mental”
Screening for Serious Mental Illness in the General Population with the K6 screening scale: Results from the WHO World Mental Health (WMH) Survey Initiative (2010, positive): “The most widely used screening scale of SMI in these studies is the K6 scale (Furukawa et al., 2003; Kessler et al., 2002, 2003), a six-question scale that was developed explicitly to estimate the prevalence of SMI as defi ned by US Public Law (PL) 102-321, the Alcohol, Drug Abuse, and Mental Health”