Cited by 2,021Mental Health Treatment and AccessAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPsychometric Methodologies and Testing

Interpreting scores on the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10)

Open access
Andrews, Gavin, Slade, Tim·2001·Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To provide normative data on the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10), a scale that is being increasingly used for clinical and epidemiological purposes. METHOD: The National Survey of Mental Health And Well-Being was used to provide normative comparative data on symptoms, disability, service utilisation and diagnosis for the range of possible K10 scores. RESULTS: The K10 is related in predictable ways to these other measures. IMPLICATIONS: The K10 is suitable to assess morbidity in the population, and may be appropriate for use in clinical practice.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1467-842x.2001.tb00310.x

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 6 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Kessler RC, Andrews G, Colpe L, et al. Short Screening Scales to Monitor Population Prevalences and Trends in Nonspecific Psychological Distress [paper]. Cambridge(MA): Department of Health Care Policy, Harvard Medi- cal School, 2000 April.
  2. Ware JE, Kosinski M, Keller SD. A 12 item short form health survey. Med Care 1996;34:220-33.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Andrews, G., & Slade, T.
Affiliations
UNSW Sydney (AU)
Corresponding author
Andrews, Gavin
Venue
Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2001-12
Volume
25
Issue
6
Pages
494-497
ISSN
1326-0200 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2025961724
Cited by
2,021
References
6
Citations by year
2026: 75 · 2025: 129 · 2024: 163 · 2023: 151 · 2022: 157 · 2021: 161 · 2020: 152 · 2019: 114 · 2018: 84 · 2017: 81 · 2016: 90 · 2015: 81 · 2014: 82 · 2013: 114 · 2012: 89
FWCI
12.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health (publishedVersion, public-domain)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › 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
Kessler Psychological Distress Scale, K10, psychological distress, reference values, psychiatric symptoms, disability, mental health service utilization, psychiatric diagnosis, population morbidity
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Australia, Mental Disorders, Family Characteristics, Health Surveys, Humans, Mental Health Services, Middle Aged, Psychological Tests, Psychometrics, Stress, Psychological, Prevalence

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