UCSF

BACKGROUND: Psychometrical evaluation of persons of diverse contexts and different populations, including general or clinical. OBJECTIVE: This review study aimed to evaluate the psychometrics quality of resilience scales. METHODS: International and Iranian databases were searched with MESH terms, including psychometric, validity, reliability, Connor-Davidson resilience scale, Resilience scale, for published articles up to 1 February 2023. For each of the selected studies, the risk of bias was evaluated using the COSMIN Risk of Bias Checklist. Then the COSMIN checklist was used to evaluate the entire text of the article for methodological quality. RESULTS: Considering the inclusion criteria, 80 documents were evaluated. According to the COSMINs criteria for evaluating the risk of bias, the current study findings revealed the included studies limitations in assessing the three versions of CD-RISC cross-cultural and content validity as well as their stability (e.g. conducting test re-test), whereas the majority of psychometric studies of CD-RISC-25, and CD-RISC-2 rated as very good or adequate in terms of structural validity. In terms of quality assessment of the included studies, the current study indicated that investigating the structural validity of the CD-RISC was mainly done based on exploratory factor analysis (EFA), and confirmatory factor analysis was absent. CONCLUSION: The general result indicates the acceptability of the quality of the studies. However, concerns for measurement properties such as responsiveness and criterion validity as well as the standard error of measurement have been neglected.