Cited by 51Psychometric Methodologies and TestingHealth Education and ValidationAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes

Factorial validity and reliability of the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12) in the Brazilian physician population

Open access
Gouveia, Valdiney V., Barbosa, Genário Alves, Andrade, Edson de Oliveira, Carneiro, Mauro Brandão·2010·Cadernos de Saúde Pública

Abstract

The 12-item General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12) is a widely used screening instrument. One- and two-factor structures have been identified in some countries. In Brazil, the best factor structure is still unclear. This study aimed at knowing its factorial validity and reliability, and testing the one-factor and two-factor models. The participants were 7,512 Brazilian physicians. They answered the GHQ-12 and demographic questions. Unrotated (one-factor) and rotated (two-factor) structures of the GHQ-12 were extracted by principal component analysis. Confirmatory factor analyses (ML) were used to compare the one- and two-factor solutions. The two-factor model fitted the data better than the one-factor one. Those two factors were depression and social dysfunction, and they showed themselves to be directly correlated to one another. They also showed adequate reliability coefficients. The two-factor model is remarkably adequate, showing better fit indices, although it is acceptable to admit a common factor, which could be defined as psychological distress.

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 · 10.1590/s0102-311x2010000700023

Cites

29 of 29 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?

  • All instruments have been translated to Portuguese with reliable psychometric properties.

    “All instruments have been translated to Portuguese with reliable psychometric properties [54–64].”

    From Study protocol of a multicenter randomized controlled trial of mindfulness training to reduce burnout and promote quality of life in police officers: The POLICE study (2018) · cites this paper as [62]

    The Instrument section identifies a Brazilian-Portuguese version of the GHQ-12, and the Discussion reports acceptable psychometric properties, including Cronbach’s alpha above 0.80. The paper says it examines only the GHQ-12, so it does not establish that all instruments in the citing sentence have Portuguese versions with reliable psychometric properties. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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 30 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Cad. Saúde Pública, Rio de Janeiro, 26(7):1439-1445, jul, 2010
  2. Sarriera JC, Schwarcz C, Câmara SG. Bem-estar psicológico: análise fatorial da escala de Goldberg (GHQ-12) numa amostra de jovens. Psicol Reflex Crít 1996; 9:293-306.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gouveia, V. V., Barbosa, G. A., Andrade, E. D. O., & Carneiro, M. B.
Affiliations
  • Universidade Federal da Paraíba (BR)
  • Universidade do Estado do Amazonas (BR)
  • Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (BR)
Venue
Cadernos de Saúde Pública
Published
2010-07
Volume
26
Issue
7
Pages
1439-1445
ISSN
0102-311X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2108204285
Cited by
51
References
30
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 6
FWCI
4.78
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc
Locations
  • Cadernos de Saúde Pública (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • LA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • Americanae (AECID Library) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Education › Health Education and Validation
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Keywords
factorial validity, test-retest reliability, factor structure, one-factor model, two-factor model, psychological distress, depression, social dysfunction, physicians, mental health screening
MeSH terms
Mental Disorders, Brazil, Factor Analysis, Statistical, Female, Health Status, Humans, Male, Physicians, Population Surveillance, Quality of Health Care, Surveys and Questionnaires, Reproducibility of Results

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