Reliability and factor structure of the 10-item kessler psychological distress scale (K10) among Portuguese adults.
Open accessAbstract
Abstract The 10-item Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10) has been presented as a valid measure to assess psychological distress levels in population surveys but its dimensional structure was not consensual. Our main objective was to provide a Portuguese version of the K10 exploring the reliability and factor structure of this measure. This cross-sectional study included 694 adults collected from a web-based survey and in training entities. Results showed that 37.9% of the individuals reported significant distress symptoms. A good internal consistency of the K10 scale (α=.91) and strong inter-item correlation (ranges from .350 to .659) were found in our study but the original one-dimensional structure was not confirmed. A two-factor model considering anxiety and depression as two latent, independent but correlated factors shows a good fit with the data even across two data collection methods. The K10 tool was sensitive to sociodemographic variables. Participants aged 40 or over and belonging to the general working class presented higher distress levels. Our data indicates the Portuguese version of K10 as a reliable tool with a factor structure to assess psychological distress.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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?
The K10 Portuguese version by Pereira et al. (2019) has 10 items that assess the frequency of non-specific psychological distress symptoms during the last month.
“We used the Portuguese version by Pereira et al. (2019), who described K10 as having 10 items that assess the frequency of non-specific psychological distress symptoms during the last month, being a self-report measure based on questions about the symptoms of anxiety and depression.”
From Burnout and Stress Measurement in Police Officers: Literature Review and a Study With the Operational Police Stress Questionnaire (2020) · cites this paper as Pereira et al., 2019
K10 cut-off points are 10-15 points for low distress, 16-21 for moderate, 22-29 for high, and 30-50 for very high; values between 22 and 50 points indicate a risk of developing a psychological disorder.
“Using this sum it is possible to identify cut-off points of stress levels, where 10–15 points correspond to “low distress,” 16–21 points to “moderate,” 22–29 points to “high,” and 30–50 points to “very high.” Values between 22 and 50 points indicate a risk of developing a psychological disorder (Andrews and Slade, 2001; Pereira et al., 2019).”
From Burnout and Stress Measurement in Police Officers: Literature Review and a Study With the Operational Police Stress Questionnaire (2020) · cites this paper as Pereira et al., 2019
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 30 · Cited by 90
- Authors
- Pereira, A., Oliveira, C. A., Bártolo, A., Monteiro, S., Vagos, P., & Jardim, J.
- Affiliations
- University of Aveiro (PT)
- University of Lisbon (PT)
- Corresponding author
- Pereira, Anabela
- Venue
- Ciência & Saúde Coletiva
- Publisher
- FapUNIFESP (SciELO)
- Published
- 2019-03
- Volume
- 24
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 729-736
- ISSN
- 1413-8123 (ISSN-L)
- 1678-4561
- OpenAlex
- W2800875233
- Cited by
- 90
- References
- 30
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 31 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 4
- FWCI
- 5.19
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Ciência & Saúde Coletiva (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- LA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
- Americanae (AECID Library) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
- Portuguese National Funding Agency for Science, Research and Technology (RCAAP Project by FCT) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Portuguese National Funding Agency for Science, Research and Technology (RCAAP Project by FCT) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
- Keywords
- Kessler Psychological Distress Scale, K10, psychological distress, factor structure, psychometric validation, anxiety, depression, Portuguese version, adults, sociodemographic differences, internal consistency
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Adult, Age Factors, Aged, Anxiety, Cross-Sectional Studies, Depression, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Portugal, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Surveys and Questionnaires, Social Class, 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
