We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.
Background. Most mental health research tools are developed in Western, urban contexts. Few studies have evaluated the applicability of these research tools in rural populations of non-Western countries. We examined the cultural acceptance and psychometric performance of the 12-item General Health Questionnaire (GHQ) in China's rural villages.
Method. Ethnographic investigations were conducted to assess the cultural applicability of self-report rating scales among villagers. This was followed by a survey of 1401 rural residents, randomly selected from 48 villages of Shandong province using stratified multistage cluster sampling. The respondents were administered the GHQ and the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI).
Results. The GHQ, when administered by trained interviewers, was culturally acceptable to rural residents. The scale had good psychometric properties in the study population. The area under the curve was 0·86. At a cut-off of 1/2, the sensitivity and specificity were 80·6% and 79·3% respectively.
Conclusions. The ethno-psychometric evaluation showed that the GHQ was both culturally valid and psychometrically sound in the Chinese rural context.
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.