Author(s): ONOUE, S., SASABA, I., Institution: RITSUMEIKAN UNIVERSITY, Country: JAPAN, Abstract-ID: 591

Introduction
Resilience in athletes is defined as a dynamic adaptive process encompassing metacognitive, emotional, and behavioral capacities in response to adversity (Gupta & McCarthy, 2022). Resilience is recognized as a crucial psychological factor for improving athletic performance and maintaining athletes’ mental health. However, some researchers have argued that most studies examining resilience in athletes have failed to accurately measure athletes’ resilience because they have used scales developed for the general adult population (e.g., Kegelaers, 2023). Therefore, this study aimed to systematically examine and evaluate resilience scales developed specifically for athletes.

Methods
A systematic literature search was conducted in December 2025 using PubMed, SPORTDiscus, Web of Science, ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, and J-STAGE (Japanese). Only the scales developed to measure individual-level resilience in athletes were included in this review. The identified scales were evaluated following the COSMIN Risk of Bias Checklist, which establishes criteria on methods for developing and validating scales, and the COSMIN Criteria for Good Measurement Properties, which establishes criteria on the quality of scales (Mokkink et al., 2024).

Results
Nine scales were included in this review. The evaluation of scales according to the COSMIN Risk of Bias Checklist (nine measurement properties) revealed that although two measurement properties (i.e., structural validity and internal consistency) were adequately tested on eight scales, two measurement properties (i.e., content validity and construct validity) were inadequately demonstrated on all scales. Moreover, scales that demonstrated all measurement properties did not exist. The evaluation of scales according to the COSMIN Criteria for Good Measurement Properties (nine measurement properties) revealed that although two measurement properties (i.e., structural validity and internal consistency) were ensured adequately in all scales, content validity was not. Additionally, scales evaluated as having adequate quality across all measurement properties did not exist.

Conclusion
This systematic review showed that no resilience scale developed for athletes fully satisfied the COSMIN guidelines. In particular, none of the reviewed scales accounted for 1) the resilience process in athletes (Gupta & McCarthy, 2022), 2) situational or contextual demands (e.g., Luthar et al., 2000), or 3) sport-specific characteristics (e.g., Wei et al., 2025), which should be reflected in the resilience scales for athletes. These findings highlight the need to develop resilience scales that follow the COSMIN guidelines and incorporate three important elements.