» Articles » PMID: 22351472

Validity Study of the K6 Scale As a Measure of Moderate Mental Distress Based on Mental Health Treatment Need and Utilization

Overview
Specialty Psychiatry
Date 2012 Feb 22
PMID 22351472
Citations 339
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The widely-used Kessler K6 non-specific distress scale screens for severe mental illness defined as a K6 score ≥ 13, estimated to afflict about 6% of US adults. The K6, as currently used, fails to capture individuals struggling with more moderate mental distress that nonetheless warrants mental health intervention. The current study determined a cutoff criterion on the K6 scale indicative of moderate mental distress based on mental health treatment need and assessed the validity of this criterion by comparing participants with identified moderate and severe mental distress on relevant clinical, impairment, and risk behavior measures. Data were analyzed from 50,880 adult participants in the 2007 California Health Interview Survey. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis identified K6 ≥ 5 as the optimal lower threshold cut-point indicative of moderate mental distress. Based on the K6, 8.6% of California adults had serious mental distress and another 27.9% had moderate mental distress. Correlates of moderate and serious mental distress were similar. Respondents with moderate mental distress had rates of mental health care utilization, impairment, substance use and other risks lower than respondents with serious mental distress and greater than respondents with none/low mental distress. The findings support expanded use and analysis of the K6 scale in quantifying and examining correlates of mental distress at a moderate, yet still clinically relevant, level.

Citing Articles

Exploring gendered racism and the mental health of rural Black women.

Ezemenaka C, Burton W, Newman S Front Public Health. 2025; 13:1525165.

PMID: 40041180 PMC: 11876034. DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2025.1525165.


Time in the United States and walking for physical activity among Black Californians: Findings from the California Health Interview Survey (2012-2017).

Mbe K, Fedyk M, Catz S, Drake C, Bidwell J, Bell J J Migr Health. 2025; 11:100315.

PMID: 40034587 PMC: 11872624. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmh.2025.100315.


Persistent effects of legal status on healthcare access and outcomes: findings from a state-wide representative cross-sectional survey in California.

Sudhinaraset M, Chen L, Pourat N, Nakphong M, De Trinidad Young M BMJ Public Health. 2025; 2(1):e000800.

PMID: 40018259 PMC: 11812880. DOI: 10.1136/bmjph-2023-000800.


Describing long-term postinjury outcomes for older New Zealanders.

Owen H, Wyeth E, Samaranayaka A, Derrett S Australas J Ageing. 2025; 44(1):e13411.

PMID: 39913673 PMC: 11801784. DOI: 10.1111/ajag.13411.


Psychological Distress in Adults With Myocardial Infarction: Implications for Health Care Utilization and Expenditure.

Thyagaturu H, Abdelhadi O, Younas H, Abugrin M, Padala V, Atti L JACC Adv. 2025; 4(2):101540.

PMID: 39886303 PMC: 11780088. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacadv.2024.101540.


References
1.
Baillie A . Predictive gender and education bias in Kessler's psychological distress Scale (k10). Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2005; 40(9):743-8. DOI: 10.1007/s00127-005-0935-9. View

2.
Kessler R, Heeringa S, Lakoma M, Petukhova M, Rupp A, Schoenbaum M . Individual and societal effects of mental disorders on earnings in the United States: results from the national comorbidity survey replication. Am J Psychiatry. 2008; 165(6):703-11. PMC: 2410028. DOI: 10.1176/appi.ajp.2008.08010126. View

3.
. Self-reported frequent mental distress among adults--United States, 1993-2001. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2004; 53(41):963-6. View

4.
Grant D, Kravitz-Wirtz N, Aguilar-Gaxiola S, Sribney W, Aydin M, Brown E . Mental health status and use of mental health services by California adults. Policy Brief UCLA Cent Health Policy Res. 2010; (PB2010-6):1-8. View

5.
Lasser K, Boyd J, Woolhandler S, Himmelstein D, McCormick D, Bor D . Smoking and mental illness: A population-based prevalence study. JAMA. 2000; 284(20):2606-10. DOI: 10.1001/jama.284.20.2606. View