ArticleCurrent psychology (New Brunswick, N.J.)2026
Psychometric evaluation of the Kessler 10 measure of psychosocial distress using the 2022 South African population-based household survey.
Article in Current psychology (New Brunswick, N.J.), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10) is widely used in epidemiological research but requires validation within South Africa's multilingual setting. This study evaluated the psychometric properties of the K10 using national population-based survey data and Item Response Theory (IRT). Graded Response Models (GRM) were used to assess factor loadings, item discrimination, and difficulty parameters, while Test Information Curves evaluated measurement precision across the distress continuum. Differential Item Functioning (DIF) analysis examined language effects, supporting cross-group reliability. All items exhibited high factor loadings (0.86-0.96) and substantial communalities (> 0.74) in the unidimensional GRM. Although the multidimensional GRM showed marginal improvement, relatively low factor loadings limited its suitability. All items had high discrimination parameters, ranging from 2.89 (K1) to 5.78 (K6). Difficulty parameters (β1-β4) followed the expected increasing pattern across response categories. Items K6 and K9 were the most informative given by the highest discrimination values. Internal consistency was excellent (Cronbach's alpha and McDonald's Omega total = 0.95), while marginal reliability under the unidimensional IRT model was moderate (0.65). Items 4, 5, 7, 8, and 10 were flagged for possible DIF by English-speaking status; effect sizes were negligible (R² < 0.002). This study provides robust evidence supporting the psychometric soundness of the K10 in a South African context. The scale functions as a unidimensional, internally consistent, and discriminating measure of psychological distress. Marginal reliability and information curves indicate it is most precise for detecting moderate-to-high distress levels, with potential for refinement in screening for milder symptoms.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.