S1 Checklist -

This mixed studies review assessed the extent of the literature related to approaches used to develop new tools that screen for distress in Indigenous adults globally. It answered the research question: What qualitative and quantitative approaches are used to develop new screening tools that assess distress in Indigenous peoples globally? CINAHL, Embase, Emcare, Medline, PsychInfo and Scopus databases were systematically searched to identify relevant articles published between January 2000 and February 2023. Articles describing the development of a new screening tool for Indigenous peoples, globally, published in English since 2000 and constituted a full publication of primary research, met the inclusion criteria. Studies underwent quality appraisal using the Mixed-Methods Appraisal Tool. A sequential exploratory design guided data analysis. Synthesis occurred using a two-phase sequential method. Nineteen articles constituted the data set. Articles described the use of qualitative, quantitative, or mixed methods in approximately equal numbers. Overall, qualitative methods were used in early stages of tool development, with mixed and quantitative methods used to pilot and validate them. However, most studies did not follow the theoretical guidelines for tool development, and while validation studies took place in over half of the data set, none adequately assessed construct validity. Sixty percent of the articles were located using citation searches, which suggests database searches were ineffective. Valid tools that screen for distress in Indigenous populations support equitable access to health care. This review found that most screening tools were developed in Australia. However, additional evidence of their validity is needed in addition to a valid diagnostic tool that supports the determination of criterion validity. These needs present important future research opportunities.