DOI: 10.62425/jopres.1919158 ISSN: 3023-4646

A Systematic Review on the Evaluation of the Psychometric Properties of Depression Scales in Turkish Language

Selcen Yüksel, Pervin Demir, Afra Alkan
Show PDF Cite
Measurement tools used to monitor the diagnosis, treatment response, and follow-up in depression should demonstrate adequate validity and reliability. This study aimed to provide a descriptive overview of the psychometric properties evaluated in the methodological studies of depression scales developed or adapted for the Turkish population. Without time restriction, depression scales developed or adapted into Turkish were identified using predefined search strategies in selected databases. To identify validity and reliability studies of the Turkish versions, additional search filters were applied in PubMed, Scopus, ScienceDirect, and ULAKBİM. A checklist of psychometric properties was developed and used to assess each study. A total of 80 articles covering 56 depression scales were included. As some studies evaluated more than one scale, 86 scale-based evaluations were conducted. All studies were reviewed across 11 psychometric domains. Interpretability was evaluated in only one methodological study of a single scale, and inappropriate statistical methods were used in studies evaluating test-retest reliability. Internal consistency, reliability, and external construct validity were the most frequently examined psychometric properties. The Depression inventory for maintenance hemodialysis patients (DI-MHD), Depression anxiety stress scale for youth (DASS-Y), and Behavioral Activation for Depression Scale (BADS) showed the highest psychometric property assessment coverage among the evaluated scales. This systematic review provides a descriptive overview of psychometric properties in methodological studies of depression scales developed or adapted for the Turkish population. Although most studies focused on basic psychometric characteristics, advanced evaluations such as test-retest reliability, measurement error, and interpretability were less frequently addressed. These findings highlight the need for greater attention to these aspects in future methodological research.

More from our Archive