Migration is a complex global phenomenon, with millions of people relocating each year driven by various social or personal reasons. Among them, refugees and asylum seekers form a particularly vulnerable subgroup, often forced to escape conflicts, persecution or life-threatening conditions. Most mental health assessment tools, originally developed in high-income countries and validated primarily in Western populations, may lack the cultural validity needed for this demographic. The primary objective is to systematically review and synthesise the psychometric properties and cultural validity of mental health assessment tools validated for refugees and asylum seekers. Secondary objectives are to (a) identify the range of mental health symptoms these tools assess and (b) describe the geographical coverage in terms of the regions of origin and host countries where tools have been validated.
Reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines, the review will conduct searches across different databases (ie, MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science Core Collection, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PsycINFO, Global Index Medicus, CINAHL and Scopus), from inception to January 2025, with no restrictions on language. We will include validation, adaptation or diagnostic accuracy studies, as well as any other study design that reports at least one psychometric property of a mental health assessment tool. Two pairs of reviewers will screen, extract and appraise each study independently. Methodological quality will be assessed with the COSMIN (COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments) Risk-of-Bias checklist for measurement studies and QUADAS-2 (Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2) for diagnostic accuracy studies; the certainty of the evidence per property will be graded using the COSMIN-GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) approach. Narrative synthesis will be performed for all properties; where appropriate, meta-analyses will pool Cronbach’s α (Fisher-Z), intraclass correlations and sensitivity/specificity estimates using random-effects models. Inconsistency will be explored with subgroup analyses and meta-regressions; publication bias will be investigated with funnel plots and Egger’s test when ≥10 studies are available.
Ethical approval is not required for this systematic review, as no empirical data will be collected. Results will be disseminated through a peer-reviewed publication in a scientific journal and presented at relevant conferences.
CRD42024510901.