Cultural adaptation of psychometric measures has become a process aimed at increasing acceptance, reliability, and validity among specific Indigenous populations. We present a systematic scoping review to: (1) identify the depression scales that have been culturally adapted for use among Indigenous populations worldwide, (2) globally report on the methods used in the cultural adaptation of those scales, and (3) describe the main features of those cultural adaptation methods. We included articles published from inception to April 2021, including 3 levels of search terms: Psychometrics, Indigenous, and Depression. The search was carried out in the Ovid Medline, PubMed, Embase, Global Health, PsycINFO, and CINAHL databases, following PRISMA guidelines. We identified 34 reports on processes of cultural adaptation that met the criteria. The scales were adapted for use among Indigenous populations from Africa, Australia, Asia, North America, and Latin America. The most common scales that underwent adaptation were the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9), the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D), and the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS). Methods of adaptation involved a revision of the measures’ cultural appropriateness, standard/transcultural translation, revision of the administration process, and inclusion of visual supports. Culturally safe administration of scales was reported in some studies. To come to a consensus on most appropriate methods of improving cultural safety of psychometric measurement, most studies utilized qualitative methods or mixed methods to understand the specific community’s needs. Revision of linguistic equivalence and cultural relevance of content, culturally safe administration procedures, qualitative methods, and participatory research were key features of developing safe culturally adapted measures for depressive symptoms among Indigenous populations. While for comparability, uniform scales would be ideal as mental health evaluations, an understanding of the cultural impact of measurements and local depression expressions would benefit the process of developing culturally sensitive psychometric scales. PROSPERO registration ID: CRD42023391439.

At a time when nationalism has reappeared in Europe, when COVID-19 is not yet quarantined and when compassion coexists with grief, there is a need to consider the impact of these societal changes on international collaboration, frequency and management of perinatal mental disorder – and new roles for psychiatrists and other health professionals in the digital and AI (artificial intelligence) post-COVID era.

Obtaining a level of consensus over the definition, construction and measurement of the concept of quality of life would allow for an improved degree of standardization in the assessment of clinical intervention for people with mental health problems. One of the many benefits of this standardization would be the ability to make valid and reliable comparisons between various interventions and across different groups or settings, which is of particular interest to economists. There are, however, a host of sociocultural issues that present fundamental obstacles to the satisfactory attainment of consensus over definitions and domains of quality of life. This paper considers the arguments pertinent to each of these two alternative perspectives, the economic and the sociocultural (or anthropological), and draws out the lessons that these perspectives — despite the apparent polarity that exists between them — can offer to the improved measurement of quality of life for those with mental health problems.

The purpose of this study was to examine characteristics of Yugoslav patients with neurasthenia diagnosed according to the ICD-10 Diagnostic Criteria for Research (ICD-10-DCR), and to examine the ICD-10-DCR symptoms of neurasthenia and applicability of the corresponding diagnostic criteria to Yugoslav patients with this condition. Thirty-four patients with the ICD-10-DCR neurasthenia and 31 patients with mixed anxiety and depressive disorder were compared in terms of demographic variables, results of several questionnaires, symptom profiles and comorbidity with other mental disorders. Patients with neurasthenia were less educated and more often held jobs as unskilled and semiskilled workers; they had a more chronic course of illness, tended to report more symptoms, manifested more hostility, somatization and hypochondriacal tendencies and received a comorbid diagnosis of hypochondriasis more frequently. In addition to exhaustion and weakness, the most prominent features of neurasthenia were irritability, anger, nervousness, various somatic symptoms and tension. An ICD-10-DCR diagnosis of neurasthenia could not be made in slightly over one-third of patients who would have otherwise met criteria for this diagnosis because of the imposed diagnostic hierarchy, ie, due to current comorbidity with affective disorders and generalized anxiety disorder in such patients. It is concluded that the ICD-10-DCR concept of neurasthenia is generally suitable for Yugoslav patients, except for the diagnostic hierarchy requirement. The diagnostic criteria therefore require revision in order to reflect more accurately the variability in clinical presentation of neurasthenia in different countries.