Abstract: Objective To systematically evaluate the measurement properties of TCM clinical efficacy assessment tools for lung cancer and the methodological quality of related studies, and to provide evidence-based reference for healthcare professionals to select high-quality assessment tools. Methods A systematic search was conducted in multiple databases, including PubMed, The Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, China Biomedical Literature Database, China Knowledge Network, Wanfang Database, and VIP. The retrieval period was from the inception of the databases to June 2023. The methodological quality and measurement properties of the identified tools were assessed using the Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN-RoB) and Scale Measurement Performance Evaluation Criteria, respectively. Based on these evaluations, final recommendations were made. Results Eight TCM clinical efficacy evaluation tools for lung cancer were finally included, and no measurement error, cross-cultural validity and measurement equivalence were reported. Conclusion The existing evidence suggests that TCM clinical efficacy evaluation tools for lung cancer could not provide comprehensive assessment, and the overall research methodology quality is low. Relatively, the research quality and performance evaluation of Quality of Life Assessment System for Cancer based on Traditional Chinese Medicine- Lung Cancer (QLASTCM-Lu) is still acceptable. In the future, the existing tools should be further improved and validated, or a new TCM clinical efficacy measurement tool for lung cancer with low-bias risk and high-applicability should be constructed.

Key words: lung cancer, traditional Chinese medicine, assessment tool, measurement property, systematic review