Rethinking students' mental health assessment through GHQ-12: evidence from the IRT approach

The General Health Questionnaire-12 (GHQ-12) is a widely used screening tool for mental health assessment however its traditional scoring methods and cutoffs may not adequately capture the mental health complexities of younger populations.

This study explores GHQ-12 responses from a sample of university students. Possible differences in means scores considering gender, age, academic field and degree course were assessed through t-test or one-way ANOVA as appropriate. To deeper understanding different levels of severity and individual item impact on general distress measurement, we applied Item-Response-Theory (IRT) techniques (two-parameters logistic model). We compared students' population with a population of workers who underwent a similar psychological evaluation.

A total of 3834 university students participated in the study. Results showed that a significant proportion (79%) of students reported psychological distress. Females and younger students obtained significantly higher average scores compared to others. IRT analysis found item-specific variations in mental distress levels, with more indicative items for short-term fluctuations and potential severe mental health concerns. Latent class analysis identified three distinct subgroups among students (including 20%, 37%, 43% of the participants respectively) with different levels of psychological distress severity. Comparison with a population of adults showed that students reported significantly higher scores with differences in the scale behavior.

Our results highlighted the unique mental health challenges faced by students, suggesting a reevaluation of GHQ-12 applicability and cutoff scores for younger populations, emphasizing the need for accurate instruments in mental health evaluation.