Through systematically reviewing the reliability and validity of depression scales of Chinese version in adults in China to evaluate the psychometric properties of depression scales for different groups.

Eligible studies published before 6 May 2016 were retrieved from the following database: CNKI, Wanfang, PubMed and Embase. The HSROC model of the diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) for Meta-analysis was used to calculate the pooled sensitivity and specificity of the PHQ-9.

A total of 44 papers evaluating the performance of depression scales were included. Results showed that the reliability and validity of the common depression scales were eligible, including the Beck depression inventory (BDI), the Hamilton depression scale (HAMD), the center epidemiological studies depression scale (CES-D), the patient health questionnaire (PHQ) and the Geriatric depression scale (GDS). The Cronbach' s coefficient of most tools were larger than 0.8, while the test-retest reliability and split-half reliability were larger than 0.7, indicating good internal consistency and stability. The criterion validity, convergent validity, discrimination validity and screening validity were acceptable though different cut-off points were recommended by different studies. The pooled sensitivity of the 11 studies evaluating PHQ-9 was 0.88 (95%CI: 0.85-0.91) while the pooled specificity was 0.89 (95%CI: 0.82-0.94), which demonstrated the applicability of PHQ-9 in screening depression.

The reliability and validity of different depression scales of Chinese version are acceptable. The characteristics of different tools and study population should be taken into consideration when choosing a specific scale.

Depression; Reliability; Validity; Systematic review; Meta-analysis