The purpose of this study was to evaluate measurement properties of self-report questionnaires for studies published in Korean nursing journals.

Of 424 Korean nursing articles initially identified, 168 articles met the inclusion criteria. The methodological quality of the measurements used in the studies and interpretability were assessed using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist. It consists of items on internal consistency, reliability, measurement error, content validity, construct validity including structural validity, hypothesis testing, cross-cultural validity, and criterion validity, and responsiveness. For each item of the COSMIN checklist, measurement properties are rated on a four-point scale: excellent, good, fair, and poor. Each measurement property is scored with worst score counts.

All articles used the classical test theory for measurement properties. Internal consistency (72.6%), construct validity (56.5%), and content validity (38.2%) were most frequently reported properties being rated as 'excellent' by COSMIN checklist, whereas other measurement properties were rarely reported.

A systematic review of measurement properties including interpretability of most instruments warrants further research and nursing-focused checklists assessing measurement properties should be developed to facilitate intervention outcomes across Korean studies.

The purpose of this study was to monitor the use of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) instruments in Korean studies of patients with diabetes.

Of 86 Korean studies initially identified, 17 studies met the inclusion criteria. For each study, a description of the instrument and its psychometric properties were monitored by the Instrument Review Criteria of the Scientific Advisory Committee. These criteria include conceptual definition, attributes, taxonomy, reliability, validity, responsiveness, administrative mode, and language adaptations.

Five generic and one diabetes specific type questionnaires were identified from the 17 studies. Of those studies, conceptual definitions with the attributes of multi-dimension and subjectiveness were provided for 11 studies (71%). In the analysis of conceptual taxonomy, only 6 studies were classified as HRQOL, while other studies were done as QOL or health status. In monitoring of psychometric properties, reliability, validity, and responsiveness were reported for 88.2%, 64.7%, and 29.4%, respectively. One generic instrument was developed with a Korean population, while the other instruments were developed for Western countries. However, language adaptations were performed for only a few of the instruments.

The psychometric properties including responsiveness of most instruments warrants further research, and the development of diabetes-specific HRQOL measurements should be sought to facilitate intervention outcomes across Korean studies of patients with diabetes.