The validation of measurement instruments requires not only psychometric rigor but also transparent reporting of ethical principles to ensure the protection of human participants and research integrity. However, the extent to which ethical aspects are adequately reported in validation studies conducted in Peru remains unknown. A descriptive study was conducted including validation studies published between 2021 and 2024 by authors affiliated with Peruvian institutions and indexed in Scopus. Reporting of ethics committee approval, informed consent, assent, data confidentiality, funding, conflicts of interest, and adherence to ethical guidelines was assessed. Factors associated with reporting ethics committee approval were explored using Poisson regression models with robust variance to estimate prevalence ratios. A total of 208 studies were included. The majority of the studies were published in English (52.9%), and the most common study populations were students (36.5%). Ethics committee approval was reported in 77.4% of the articles, and informed consent in 91.8%. Only 63.4% specified an ethics approval code, and 61.0% failed to report assent when it was applicable. Compared with articles published in Q1 journals, those published in lower-quartile and non-quartile journals showed a lower prevalence of reporting ethics committee approval, and articles published in Spanish showed a lower prevalence than those published in English, whereas studies with five or more authors and multicity designs showed a higher prevalence of reporting ethics committee approval. Substantial gaps persist in the transparency of ethical reporting in validation studies conducted in Peru. Strengthening editorial requirements and promoting greater awareness among researchers are essential to enhance ethical compliance and protect research participants.
Tejada-Flores et al. (Wed,) studied this question.