The relevance of studying diseases of the circulatory system emphasizes the need to identify and manage socially distressing risk factors that affect a person's psychophysiological state. Modern research convincingly demonstrates the relationship between social distress and the development of cardiovascular pathology, but there is a shortage of standardized tools for a comprehensive assessment of these factors. The main purpose of this work is to determine the list of valid techniques that can be used for the constructive validation of the author's comprehensive survey methodology "Questionnaire for the study of socio-distressing determinants of diseases of the circulatory system." Materials and methods. The above-mentioned author's questionnaire, developed by L.I. Orekhova and V.S. Glushanko, was used as the main research tool. It consists of 99 questions grouped into 5 blocks, including passport data, quality of life assessment, identification of the main spheres of life, social and medical profile and factors influencing preventive measures. To assess the constructive, namely convergent, validity, a comparative analysis of the author's questionnaire was carried out with a number of proven methods, such as the quality of life questionnaires (SF-36, WHOQOL-BREF), the perceived stress scale (PSS), the L.I. Wasserman social frustration questionnaire, the Maslach burnout questionnaire (MBI), the cardiorisk assessment scales (SCORE/SCORE2) and questionnaires on the detection of non-communicable diseases. Results. As a result of the analysis, it was revealed that the multi-block structure of the author's questionnaire requires confirmation of its constructive validity through comparison with similar tools. It was found that the author's questionnaire blocks have significant thematic overlap with recognized validated methods. In particular, the sections on quality of life are comparable to SF-36 and WHOQOL-BREF; the blocks identifying stressors in various areas of life correlate with PSS, Wasserman's USF, and MBI. The sections on medical indicators and preventive measures find analogues in medical questionnaires for assessing chronic diseases. Conclusion. To verify the constructive validity of the author's questionnaire, it is recommended to use the WHOQOL-BREF questionnaires, SCORE/SCORE-2 scales and the L.I. Wasserman USF questionnaire. The author's questionnaire is unique in that it establishes a direct link between the socio-distressing determinants of BSK and medical outcomes, which makes it a valuable tool for socio-hygienic and epidemiological research.