Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30602296›Full record

ArticleCanadian journal of psychiatry. Revue canadienne de psychiatrie2019

The Psychometric Properties of the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K6) in an Epidemiological Sample of Canadian Youth.

Mark A Ferro

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Canadian journal of psychiatry. Revue canadienne de psychiatrie, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 42 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
42citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

42 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Frontiers in psychology · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Mental health service use among Black adolescents in Ontario by sex and distress level: a cross-sectional study.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Mark A Ferro1 School of Public Health and Health Systems, University of Waterloo, Ontario.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThis study (1) describes the distribution of Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K6) scores in an epidemiological sample of youth, (2) reports its item correlations and internal consistency reliability, (3) tests for measurement invariance by age (youth vs. adults) and sex, and (4) examines its predictive power for past-year psychiatric disorders.

methodYouth aged 15 to 19 years (

resultsK6 scores showed a J-shaped distribution, with >50% of youth having scores ≤3. Item and total scores were higher for females versus males. Item correlations were robust (0.31-0.78) and internal consistency was high (α = 0.86). Full measurement invariance was demonstrated between youth and adults, as well as between male and female youth. The K6 was a strong predictor of major depressive episode (AUC = 0.848), generalized anxiety disorder (AUC = 0.847), and bipolar disorder (AUC = 0.853).

conclusionsThe K6 is a valid and reliable measure of psychological distress among youth. Its brevity and robust predictive power for psychiatric disorder confirm its utility in clinical and community settings to identify youth needing comprehensive psychiatric assessment.

Indexed as

Psychological DistressAdolescentAdultCanadaFemaleHealth SurveysHumansMaleMental DisordersMiddle AgedPsychiatric Status Rating ScalesPsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsYoung Adultadolescentmeasurementmental disordermental healthvalidity

Identifiers

PMID30602296
PMCPMC6699029

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.