The DOI matches its Crossref record; 22 of the 24 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Distress Questionnaire-5: Population screener for psychological distress was more accurate than the K6/K10
Open accessAbstract
Objective The K6 and K10 are well-validated screening measures for psychological distress and are widely used. However, the accuracy of these scales in identifying common mental disorders may be suboptimal. This study aimed to develop a brief scale of psychological distress--the Distress Questionnaire-5 (DQ5)--and validate its diagnostic accuracy in identifying common mental disorders, relative to the K6 and K10.Study design and setting The DQ5 was developed from a pool of 347 items reflecting a range of mental health symptoms. Validation of the DQ5 was conducted concurrently, on the basis of DSM-5 criteria for seven common mental disorders. A population-based sample of Australian adults (n = 3,175) was recruited online, with data weighted to reflect population estimates of disorder prevalence, age, and gender.Results At specified cut points, the DQ5 was significantly more accurate in identifying individuals who met criteria for each of the disorders examined relative to the K6, with the exception of major depression where there was no significant difference in sensitivity or specificity.Conclusion The DQ5 is a promising tool for identifying psychological distress in the community, with potential for use in a range of clinical settings.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Randomization was stratified on general psychological distress symptom severity (as measured by the DQ5 (Batterham et al., 2016) at pre-test score 5–13 vs. 14–25), age (18–45 vs. 46+ years), and gender (female/male) (permuted block randomization, block size of 6 within each stratum) to ensure balance across conditions.”
From Predictors of acceptability and engagement in a self-guided online program for depression and anxiety (2021) · cites this paper as Batterham et al., 2016
In the citing paper
“The DQ5 demonstrated good internal consistency (Cronbach’s α = 0.74).”
From The effect of a therapeutic smartphone application on suicidal ideation in young adults: Findings from a randomized controlled trial in Australia. (2022) · cites this paper as [30]
Citations
Cites
KESSLER, R. C., ANDREWS, G., COLPE, L. J., HIRIPI, E., MROCZEK, D. K., NORMAND, S.-L. T., WALTERS, E. E., & ZASLAVSKY, A. M. (2002) · Psychological Medicine · doi:10.1017/s0033291702006074 · Cited by 10,327
The Patient Health Questionnaire-2: Validity of a Two-Item Depression Screener
Kroenke, K., Spitzer, R. L., & Williams, J. B. W. (2003) · Medical Care · doi:10.1097/01.mlr.0000093487.78664.3c · Cited by 6,359
Screening for serious mental illness in the general population
Kessler, R. C., Barker, P. R., Colpe, L. J., Epstein, J. F., Gfroerer, J. C., Hiripi, E., Howes, M. J., Normand, S.-L. T., Manderscheid, R. W., Walters, E. E., et al. (2003) · Archives of General Psychiatry · doi:10.1001/archpsyc.60.2.184 · Cited by 5,692
Anxiety disorders in primary care: prevalence, impairment, comorbidity, and detection
Kroenke, K., Spitzer, R. L., Williams, J. B. W., Monahan, P. O., & Löwe, B. (2007) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-146-5-200703060-00004 · Cited by 4,741
An Ultra-Brief Screening Scale for Anxiety and Depression: The PHQ–4
Kroenke, K., Spitzer, R. L., Williams, J. B. W., & Löwe, B. (2009) · Psychosomatics · doi:10.1016/s0033-3182(09)70864-3 · Cited by 4,261
The Validity of Two Versions of the GHQ in the WHO Study of Mental Illness in General Health Care
GOLDBERG, D. P., GATER, R., SARTORIUS, N., USTUN, T. B., PICCINELLI, M., GUREJE, O., & RUTTER, C. (1997) · Psychological Medicine · doi:10.1017/s0033291796004242 · Cited by 3,657
Pilkonis, P. A., Choi, S. W., Reise, S. P., Stover, A. M., Riley, W. T., Cella, D., & PROMIS Cooperative Group (2011) · Assessment · doi:10.1177/1073191111411667 · Cited by 2,132
Performance of a Five-Item Mental Health Screening Test
Berwick, D. M., Murphy, J. M., Goldman, P. A., Ware, J. E., Barsky, A. J., & Weinstein, M. C. (1991) · Medical Care · doi:10.1097/00005650-199102000-00008 · Cited by 1,660
FURUKAWA, T. A., KESSLER, R. C., SLADE, T., & ANDREWS, G. (2003) · Psychological Medicine · doi:10.1017/s0033291702006700 · Cited by 1,570
Self-citationKessler, R. C., Green, J. G., Gruber, M. J., Sampson, N. A., Bromet, E., Cuitan, M., Furukawa, T. A., Gureje, O., Hinkov, H., Hu, C., et al. (2010) · International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research · doi:10.1002/mpr.310 · Cited by 1,434
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Staples, L. G., Dear, B. F., Gandy, M., Fogliati, V., Fogliati, R., Karin, E., Nielssen, O., & Titov, N. (2019) · General Hospital Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2018.11.003 · Cited by 405
Batterham, P. J., Sunderland, M., Slade, T. N., Calear, A. L., & Carragher, N. (2017) · Psychological Medicine · doi:10.1017/s0033291717002835 · Cited by 110
Psychosocial impacts of home-schooling on parents and caregivers during the COVID-19 pandemic
Calear, A. L., McCallum, S. M., Morse, A. R., Banfield, M., Gulliver, A., Cherbuin, N., Farrer, L. M., Murray, K., Harris, R. M. R., & Batterham, P. J. (2022) · BMC Public Health · doi:10.1186/s12889-022-12532-2 · Cited by 79
Torok, M., Han, J., McGillivray, L., Wong, Q., Werner-Seidler, A., O’Dea, B., Calear, A., & Christensen, H. (2022) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1003978 · Cited by 71
“To this end, linear mixed models for repeated measures analyses were used to examine primary (SIDAS) and secondary outcomes (PHQ-9, GAD-7, DQ5, and SWEMWBS) across T0, T1, and T2, including all available data from participants.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialGrant, J. B., Batterham, P. J., McCallum, S. M., Werner‐Seidler, A., & Calear, A. L. (2023) · Journal of Affective Disorders · doi:10.1016/j.jad.2023.02.024 · Cited by 91
Metadata
- Authors
- Batterham, P. J., Sunderland, M., Carragher, N., Calear, A. L., Mackinnon, A. J., & Slade, T.
- Affiliations
- Australian National University (AU)
- UNSW Sydney (AU)
- The University of Melbourne (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Batterham, Philip J.
- ORCID
- Venue
- Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2016-03
- Volume
- 71
- Pages
- 35-42
- ISSN
- 0895-4356 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2177427600
- Cited by
- 146
- References
- 24
- Citations by year
- 2026: 12 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 26 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 21 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 3
- FWCI
- 7.65
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- handle.unsw.edu.au
- Licence
- cc-by-nc-nd
- www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
- Locations
- Journal of Clinical Epidemiology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- UNSWorks (UNSW Sydney) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- UNSWorks (University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Funders
- National Institute for Health and Care Research
- National Institutes of Health
- National Institute of Mental Health
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Mental Health Treatment and Access
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
- Keywords
- psychological distress, K6, K10, common mental disorders, diagnostic accuracy, screening tool, major depressive disorder, sensitivity and specificity, DSM-5 diagnostic criteria, community mental health
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Australia, Mental Disorders, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Surveys and Questionnaires, ROC Curve, Sensitivity and Specificity, Stress, Psychological, Reproducibility of Results, Young Adult
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
